The Hidden Disorder Divide: Reconciling Benchmark Inconsistencies in Intrinsically Disordered Protein Binding Site Prediction
Nawar MalhisiD, Mahta MehdiabadiiD, Gábor ErdősiD, Jörg A. GsponeriD, Lukasz KurganiD, Silvio C. E. TosattoiD, Zsuzsanna DosztányiiD, Damiano PiovesaniD
Abstract
Computational predictors of protein-binding sites within intrinsically disordered regions (IDRs) show highly inconsistent performance across high-quality benchmark datasets. To understand the origins of these discrepancies, we systematically compared predictors across three independent test sets: two CAID datasets updated with the latest DisProt annotations and a composite dataset (DBs) assembled from DIBS, FuzDB, IDEAL, and MFIB. Predictors trained predominantly on DisProt data achieved substantially higher AUCs on the CAID sets but performed poorly on the DBs. In contrast, predictors trained on older, low-quality PDB-based datasets showed balanced performance across all sets, with a slight preference for DBs. Predictors with mixed training exposure displayed intermediate behavior. Through controlled experiments using identical CNN architectures and feature analysis, we demonstrate that the dominant factor driving these performance differences is the intrinsic disorder propensity of the binding sites themselves. Binding residues in DisProt-based datasets exhibit markedly higher average disorder propensity scores than those in PDB-derived datasets. This previously unrecognized selection bias -- literature studies preferentially characterizing more disordered binding sites, while PDB-derived annotations capture less disordered ones -- effectively splits IDR-protein binding sites into two distinct categories. Predictors optimized on one category therefore generalize poorly to the other. Binding-site length and sequence conservation play only minor or negligible roles in explaining the observed inconsistencies. These findings highlight a critical limitation in current benchmarking practices and training strategies for IDR-binding site prediction, underscoring the need for more balanced and disorder-aware reference datasets. Finally, the diagnostic techniques introduced here could prove valuable beyond the specific application examined in this study. The data and code used to generate all figures and tables are available at: https://github.com/NawarMalhis/HDD
02 /Specification & Classification
Click any tag to browse matching papers- Citations
- 0
- Assay
- Research Focus
- Approach
Reproducibility ledger
Nobody has reported trying to reproduce this paper yet. Did you replicate an experiment or run the code? Your report saves the next lab a week.
Sign in to file a reproducibility report.
Related papers
- Critical Assessment of Protein Intrinsic Disorder Prediction
Marco Necci, Damiano Piovesan, … Silvio C. E. Tosatto·Nature MethodsPeer-reviewed·Apr 19, 2021
- A Comprehensive Atlas and Machine-Learning Framework for Predicting IDR-Protein Binding Affinity
Subinoy Adhikari, Soham Choudhuri, Jagannath Mondal·bioRxiv·Feb 23, 2026
- IDBSpred: An intrinsically disordered binding site predictor using machine learning and protein language model
Drew Jones, Yinghao Wu·bioRxiv·Mar 31, 2026
- PredIDR: Accurate prediction of protein intrinsic disorder regions using deep convolutional neural network
Kun‐Sop Han, Se-Ryong Song, … Damiano Piovesan·International Journal of Biological MacromoleculesPeer-reviewed·Nov 19, 2024
- BindCORE: Biophysical Ensemble Learning for Predicting Interaction Sites in Intrinsically Disordered Regions
Nicolas Buton, Luiz Felipe Piochi, Hamed Khakzad·bioRxiv·Aug 22, 2026
- Probabilistic Annotations of Protein Sequences for Intrinsically Disordered Features
Nawar Malhis·bioRxiv·Dec 18, 2024