CAID prediction portal: a comprehensive service for predicting intrinsic disorder and binding regions in proteins
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Intrinsic disorder (ID) in proteins is well-established in structural biology, with increasing evidence for its involvement in essential biological processes. As measuring dynamic ID behavior experimentally on a large scale remains difficult, scores of published ID predictors have tried to fill this gap. Unfortunately, their heterogeneity makes it difficult to compare performance, confounding biologists wanting to make an informed choice. To address this issue, the Critical Assessment of protein Intrinsic Disorder (CAID) benchmarks predictors for ID and binding regions as a community blind-test in a standardized computing environment. Here we present the CAID Prediction Portal, a web server executing all CAID methods on user-defined sequences. The server generates standardized output and facilitates comparison between methods, producing a consensus prediction highlighting high-confidence ID regions. The website contains extensive documentation explaining the meaning of different CAID statistics and providing a brief description of all methods. Predictor output is visualized in an interactive feature viewer and made available for download in a single table, with the option to recover previous sessions via a private dashboard. The CAID Prediction Portal is a valuable resource for researchers interested in studying ID in proteins. The server is available at the URL: https://caid.idpcentral.org.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".