ArticleNature methods2026
A comprehensive benchmark of sequence-based subcellular localization predictors for human proteins.
Article in Nature methods, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- A comprehensive benchmark of sequence-based subcellular localization predictors for human proteins.Nature methods · 2026Article
- Technologies to measure and modulate protein subcellular localization.Nature reviews. Molecular cell biology · 2026Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Computational sequence-based predictors of protein localization have the potential to accelerate the discovery of protein functions and interactions, thereby advancing our understanding of human biology and disease. While many methods have been proposed, evaluations remain limited by small test sets, coarse-grained cellular compartment labels and single-label classification, despite the fact that nearly half of human proteins localize to multiple compartments. Here we integrate annotations from major protein databases to construct a highly validated, twofold larger benchmark test set of 3,814 human proteins. Using this dataset, we systematically evaluate existing sequence-based predictors and compare combinations of protein language models and aggregation strategies. We find that current models underperform on fine-grained compartments, multilocalizing proteins and pathogenic variants known to mislocalize. Our results reveal fundamental limitations of existing approaches and underscore the need for improved models, standardized benchmark datasets and more rigorous evaluation in subcellular localization prediction.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What Socratic holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the Socratic graph.