Papers › PoseX: AI Defeats Physics Approaches on Protein-Ligand Cross Docking
PoseX: AI Defeats Physics Approaches on Protein-Ligand Cross Docking
Yize Jiang, Xinze Li, Yuanyuan Zhang, Jin Han, Youjun Xu, Ayush Pandit, Zaixi Zhang, Mengdi Wang, Mengyang Wang, Chong Liu, Guang Yang, Yejin Choi, Wu-Jun Li, Tianfan Fu, Fang Wu, Junhong Liu
Existing protein-ligand docking studies typically focus on the self-docking scenario, which is less practical in real applications. Moreover, some studies involve heavy frameworks requiring extensive training, posing challenges for convenient and efficient assessment of docking methods. To fill these gaps, we design PoseX, an open-source benchmark to evaluate both self-docking and cross-docking, enabling a practical and comprehensive assessment of algorithmic advances. Specifically, we curated a novel dataset comprising 718 entries for self-docking and 1,312 entries for cross-docking; second, we incorporated 23 docking methods in three methodological categories, including physics-based methods (e.g., Schr\"odinger Glide), AI docking methods (e.g., DiffDock) and AI co-folding methods (e.g., AlphaFold3); third, we developed a relaxation method for post-processing to minimize conformational energy and refine binding poses; fourth, we built a leaderboard to rank submitted models in real-time. We derived some key insights and conclusions from extensive experiments: (1) AI approaches have consistently outperformed physics-based methods in overall docking success rate. (2) Most intra- and intermolecular clashes of AI approaches can be greatly alleviated with relaxation, which means combining AI modeling with physics-based post-processing could achieve excellent performance. (3) AI co-folding methods exhibit ligand chirality issues, except for Boltz-1x, which introduced physics-inspired potentials to fix hallucinations, suggesting modeling on stereochemistry improves the structural plausibility markedly. (4) Specifying binding pockets significantly promotes docking performance, indicating that pocket information can be leveraged adequately, particularly for AI co-folding methods, in future modeling efforts. The code, dataset, and leaderboard are released at https://github.com/CataAI/PoseX.
In Syntology Open this paper in Syntology's Atlas, the map of the papers in Syntology's graph and their citations.
For agents, Syntology's MCP tool lists every function and class Syntology harvested from this paper and whether it ran (how to connect): get_harvested_code_for_paper(arxiv_id="2505.01700")
Code
Syntology Ran 0 of 5 code samples harvested from 1 repository linked to this paper; 5 have no recorded run.
By repository: official repository: 5 samples from 1 repository, 0 ran. The run record, sample by sample. “Ran” means executed on a synthesized input, not that the code is correct or reproduces the paper.
Repository list and official/mentioned flags are the archive's, frozen 2025-07-28. Reachability, where shown, is from one Syntology probe window (2026-09-16 to 2026-09-18); repositories not probed show nothing. GitHub stars are not tracked.
Code Syntology ran Syntology
5 samples harvested; 0 ran; 0 honoured the contract we drafted; 5 have no recorded run. Read from Syntology's graph 2026-09-24; that is when this build read the record, not when the samples ran.
Licence: 0 of the 5 samples are pointer only, meaning Syntology does not serve that copy's text. This page shows no code text for any sample; each one links to its file in the repository.
Harvested from cataai/posex. “Ran” means the sample executed on a synthesized input. It does not mean the output is correct, and nothing here reproduces the paper's results. “Honoured” and “violated” refer to a contract Syntology drafted from the code itself; “our draft was wrong” and “fixture could not drive it” are failures of Syntology's instrument, not of the code.
Each sample ends with its code_sha256, Syntology's identity for that exact code. An agent fetches the stored sample with Syntology's MCP tool get_code(code_sha256="…") (how to connect); click an identity to copy that call.
Repository labels, per sample. official repository: The archive marks this repository official for the paper. named in the paper: The archive records that the paper mentions this repository; it is not marked official. community (archive-listed): In the archive's code links for this paper, not marked official and not recorded as mentioned in the paper. found in paper text by Syntology: Syntology found this repository in the paper's own text; whether it is the authors' implementation is not asserted. community: Not in the archive's code links for this paper; a community repository Syntology harvested. Samples from a repository marked official are listed first. Licence labels name the repository's licence as recorded at harvest. “Pointer only” means Syntology does not serve that copy's text, for one of four reasons: no licence file was found; the licence was not identified; the licence is recorded as permissive but that copy's record is not marked cleared; or the licence is outside the permissive list Syntology serves text under (MIT, Apache-2.0, BSD and similar). Some licences outside that list permit redistribution, such as WTFPL, and GPL-3.0 under its conditions; they are simply not on the list. Hover a licence label for the reason. File links open the file on GitHub at the default branch, which may have changed since the harvest.
fa7cf90cf05bc2de · report
1ec56d9a692a07bd · report
37c757a50b17fb86 · report
4dd146c06715e7be · report
2675ef5eb206acc8 · report
Tasks
Results from the paper archive 2025-07-28
No leaderboard rows for this paper in the archive.
Methods
Report a problem or propose a change · a person checks every report against the paper or source before anything changes; decisions are listed on /corrections