% IMPORTANT: The following is UTF-8 encoded. This means that in the presence
% of non-ASCII characters, it will not work with BibTeX 0.99 or older.
% Instead, you should use an up-to-date BibTeX implementation like “bibtex8” or
% “biber”.
@ARTICLE{Lawson:904333,
author = {Lawson, Catherine L. and Kryshtafovych, Andriy and Adams,
Paul D. and Afonine, Pavel V. and Baker, Matthew L. and
Barad, Benjamin A. and Bond, Paul and Burnley, Tom and Cao,
Renzhi and Cheng, Jianlin and Chojnowski, Grzegorz and
Cowtan, Kevin and Dill, Ken A. and DiMaio, Frank and
Farrell, Daniel P. and Fraser, James S. and Herzik, Mark A.
and Hoh, Soon Wen and Hou, Jie and Hung, Li-Wei and Igaev,
Maxim and Joseph, Agnel P. and Kihara, Daisuke and Kumar,
Dilip and Mittal, Sumit and Monastyrskyy, Bohdan and Olek,
Mateusz and Palmer, Colin M. and Patwardhan, Ardan and
Perez, Alberto and Pfab, Jonas and Pintilie, Grigore D. and
Richardson, Jane S. and Rosenthal, Peter B. and Sarkar,
Daipayan and Schäfer, Luisa U. and Schmid, Michael F. and
Schröder, Gunnar F. and Shekhar, Mrinal and Si, Dong and
Singharoy, Abishek and Terashi, Genki and Terwilliger,
Thomas C. and Vaiana, Andrea and Wang, Liguo and Wang, Zhe
and Wankowicz, Stephanie A. and Williams, Christopher J. and
Winn, Martyn and Wu, Tianqi and Yu, Xiaodi and Zhang,
Kaiming and Berman, Helen M. and Chiu, Wah},
title = {{C}ryo-{EM} model validation recommendations based on
outcomes of the 2019 {EMD}ata{R}esource challenge},
journal = {Nature methods},
volume = {18},
number = {2},
issn = {1548-7091},
address = {London [u.a.]},
publisher = {Nature Publishing Group},
reportid = {FZJ-2021-05903},
pages = {156 - 164},
year = {2021},
abstract = {This paper describes outcomes of the 2019 Cryo-EM Model
Challenge. The goals were to (1) assess the quality of
models that can be produced from cryogenic electron
microscopy (cryo-EM) maps using current modeling software,
(2) evaluate reproducibility of modeling results from
different software developers and users and (3) compare
performance of current metrics used for model evaluation,
particularly Fit-to-Map metrics, with focus on near-atomic
resolution. Our findings demonstrate the relatively high
accuracy and reproducibility of cryo-EM models derived by 13
participating teams from four benchmark maps, including
three forming a resolution series (1.8 to 3.1 Å). The
results permit specific recommendations to be made about
validating near-atomic cryo-EM structures both in the
context of individual experiments and structure data
archives such as the Protein Data Bank. We recommend the
adoption of multiple scoring parameters to provide full and
objective annotation and assessment of the model, reflective
of the observed cryo-EM map density.},
cin = {IBI-7},
ddc = {610},
cid = {I:(DE-Juel1)IBI-7-20200312},
pnm = {5244 - Information Processing in Neuronal Networks
(POF4-524)},
pid = {G:(DE-HGF)POF4-5244},
typ = {PUB:(DE-HGF)16},
pubmed = {pmid:33542514},
UT = {WOS:000614686600012},
doi = {10.1038/s41592-020-01051-w},
url = {https://juser.fz-juelich.de/record/904333},
}