rewire.it
Task

PFMBench CLONING-CLF: Cloning CLF

Cloning CLF. Scored with AUROC on Cloning CLF. Fine-tuned with an adapter under the PFMBench harness; train, validation and test counts are in Table 1.

12 evaluations · 12 metric rows

Overview

Cloning CLF. Scored with AUROC on Cloning CLF. Fine-tuned with an adapter under the PFMBench harness; train, validation and test counts are in Table 1.

Consult the linked sources for architecture or protocol details. Missing evidence is not evidence of a missing capability.

Evaluation design

Benchmarks bring together tasks and protocols. A task describes the biological question; a protocol defines a particular test.

Benchmarks

These source-backed links do not make different protocols or scores interchangeable.

Recorded evaluations

Each evaluation records what was tested and under which conditions.

Run instructions

No runnable recipe has been reviewed for this task. Dataset access, model requirements, licences and compute requirements must be checked against its sources before execution.

A task describes a biological question. Choose a linked protocol to obtain concrete split and scoring instructions.

Published comparisons

Explore the results reported under one evaluation protocol. Each figure keeps its source, dataset and metric together; it is not a ranking across studies. The pooled view gathers every source table that reports the same metric and names what it does not hold constant.

PFMBench CLONING-CLF: Cloning CLF

auroc (fraction) · Higher values are better for this metric.

Every method PFMBench reports on Cloning CLF, scored with AUROC on Cloning CLF.

Evaluation protocol · Cloning CLF (PFMBench split)

  1. ESM-2 · Configuration · Author-reported evaluation0.80586
  2. VenusPLM · Configuration · Author-reported evaluation0 .83172
  3. ESM-C · Configuration · Author-reported evaluation0.81033
  4. ProtGPT2 · Configuration · Author-reported evaluation0.77730
  5. PGLM · Configuration · Author-reported evaluation0.83638
  6. ProtT5 · Configuration · Author-reported evaluation0.78485
  7. DPLM · Configuration · Author-reported evaluation0.81247
  8. SaProt · Configuration · Author-reported evaluation0.81206
  9. ProstT5 · Configuration · Author-reported evaluation0.79853
  10. ProtST · Configuration · Author-reported evaluation0.80714
  11. ESM3 · Configuration · Author-reported evaluation0.77391
  12. ProTrek · Configuration · Author-reported evaluation0.82612

Source order is preserved. Plotted marks show point estimates; uncertainty, where reported, is retained in the printed values and table. Differences do not establish statistical significance.

pfmbench primary benchmark evidence · Table 1, row(Cloning CLF)
Values, uncertainty and evidence
auroc: original source values
Tested entityPrinted valueUncertaintyEvidence
ESM-2 · Configuration0.80586 fractionNot reportedAuthor-reported evaluation · source checkedpfmbench primary benchmark evidence · Table 3, row(ESM-2 [ 35 ]), column(Clo. CLF)
VenusPLM · Configuration0 .83172 fractionNot reportedAuthor-reported evaluation · source checkedpfmbench primary benchmark evidence · Table 3, row(VenusPLM [ 59 ]), column(Clo. CLF)
ESM-C · Configuration0.81033 fractionNot reportedAuthor-reported evaluation · source checkedpfmbench primary benchmark evidence · Table 3, row(ESM-C), column(Clo. CLF)
ProtGPT2 · Configuration0.77730 fractionNot reportedAuthor-reported evaluation · source checkedpfmbench primary benchmark evidence · Table 3, row(ProtGPT2 [ 12 ]), column(Clo. CLF)
PGLM · Configuration0.83638 fractionNot reportedAuthor-reported evaluation · source checkedpfmbench primary benchmark evidence · Table 3, row(PGLM [ 5 ]), column(Clo. CLF)
ProtT5 · Configuration0.78485 fractionNot reportedAuthor-reported evaluation · source checkedpfmbench primary benchmark evidence · Table 3, row(ProtT5 [ 11 ]), column(Clo. CLF)
DPLM · Configuration0.81247 fractionNot reportedAuthor-reported evaluation · source checkedpfmbench primary benchmark evidence · Table 3, row(DPLM [ 68 ]), column(Clo. CLF)
SaProt · Configuration0.81206 fractionNot reportedAuthor-reported evaluation · source checkedpfmbench primary benchmark evidence · Table 3, row(SaProt [ 55 ]), column(Clo. CLF)
ProstT5 · Configuration0.79853 fractionNot reportedAuthor-reported evaluation · source checkedpfmbench primary benchmark evidence · Table 3, row(ProstT5 [ 21 ]), column(Clo. CLF)
ProtST · Configuration0.80714 fractionNot reportedAuthor-reported evaluation · source checkedpfmbench primary benchmark evidence · Table 3, row(ProtST [ 71 ]), column(Clo. CLF)
ESM3 · Configuration0.77391 fractionNot reportedAuthor-reported evaluation · source checkedpfmbench primary benchmark evidence · Table 3, row(ESM3 [ 18 ]), column(Clo. CLF)
ProTrek · Configuration0.82612 fractionNot reportedAuthor-reported evaluation · source checkedpfmbench primary benchmark evidence · Table 3, row(ProTrek [ 56 ]), column(Clo. CLF)
Scope and limitations
  • Author-reported numbers, source checked but not independently reproduced.
  • The metric differs by task, taken from Table 1, so these figures cannot be averaged into one score.
  • Table 3 scores come from adapter fine-tuning; the ProteinGym figure is zero-shot and is not comparable to them.

Source transcription and grouping reviewed by automated source review on 2026-09-18. These experiments were not independently reproduced by rewire.

Tested entities and results

Release 2026-09-17-134cd1815de8 · 12 evaluations · 12 metric rows. Different protocols are not a single leaderboard. Where several source tables report the same metric, the published comparisons above offer a pooled view that names what it does not hold constant.

Results grouped by the exact reported evaluation
Metric and findingCoverage and uncertaintyEvidence
DPLM on PFMBench CLONING-CLF: Cloning CLF

Fine-tuned with an adapter under the PFMBench harness; train, validation and test counts are in Table 1.

Author-reported evaluation · Evaluation metadata: source checked

0.81247 auroc

Unit: fraction · Direction: higher

Uncertainty: Not reported

Scored: Not reported · Eligible: Not reported

source checkedpfmbench primary benchmark evidence · Table 3, row(DPLM [ 68 ]), column(Clo. CLF)

Source checking is not independent reproduction.

ESM-2 on PFMBench CLONING-CLF: Cloning CLF

Fine-tuned with an adapter under the PFMBench harness; train, validation and test counts are in Table 1.

Author-reported evaluation · Evaluation metadata: source checked

0.80586 auroc

Unit: fraction · Direction: higher

Uncertainty: Not reported

Scored: Not reported · Eligible: Not reported

source checkedpfmbench primary benchmark evidence · Table 3, row(ESM-2 [ 35 ]), column(Clo. CLF)

Source checking is not independent reproduction.

ESM-C on PFMBench CLONING-CLF: Cloning CLF

Fine-tuned with an adapter under the PFMBench harness; train, validation and test counts are in Table 1.

Author-reported evaluation · Evaluation metadata: source checked

0.81033 auroc

Unit: fraction · Direction: higher

Uncertainty: Not reported

Scored: Not reported · Eligible: Not reported

source checkedpfmbench primary benchmark evidence · Table 3, row(ESM-C), column(Clo. CLF)

Source checking is not independent reproduction.

ESM3 on PFMBench CLONING-CLF: Cloning CLF

Fine-tuned with an adapter under the PFMBench harness; train, validation and test counts are in Table 1.

Author-reported evaluation · Evaluation metadata: source checked

0.77391 auroc

Unit: fraction · Direction: higher

Uncertainty: Not reported

Scored: Not reported · Eligible: Not reported

source checkedpfmbench primary benchmark evidence · Table 3, row(ESM3 [ 18 ]), column(Clo. CLF)

Source checking is not independent reproduction.

PGLM on PFMBench CLONING-CLF: Cloning CLF

Fine-tuned with an adapter under the PFMBench harness; train, validation and test counts are in Table 1.

Author-reported evaluation · Evaluation metadata: source checked

0.83638 auroc

Unit: fraction · Direction: higher

Uncertainty: Not reported

Scored: Not reported · Eligible: Not reported

source checkedpfmbench primary benchmark evidence · Table 3, row(PGLM [ 5 ]), column(Clo. CLF)

Source checking is not independent reproduction.

ProstT5 on PFMBench CLONING-CLF: Cloning CLF

Fine-tuned with an adapter under the PFMBench harness; train, validation and test counts are in Table 1.

Author-reported evaluation · Evaluation metadata: source checked

0.79853 auroc

Unit: fraction · Direction: higher

Uncertainty: Not reported

Scored: Not reported · Eligible: Not reported

source checkedpfmbench primary benchmark evidence · Table 3, row(ProstT5 [ 21 ]), column(Clo. CLF)

Source checking is not independent reproduction.

ProtGPT2 on PFMBench CLONING-CLF: Cloning CLF

Fine-tuned with an adapter under the PFMBench harness; train, validation and test counts are in Table 1.

Author-reported evaluation · Evaluation metadata: source checked

0.77730 auroc

Unit: fraction · Direction: higher

Uncertainty: Not reported

Scored: Not reported · Eligible: Not reported

source checkedpfmbench primary benchmark evidence · Table 3, row(ProtGPT2 [ 12 ]), column(Clo. CLF)

Source checking is not independent reproduction.

ProTrek on PFMBench CLONING-CLF: Cloning CLF

Fine-tuned with an adapter under the PFMBench harness; train, validation and test counts are in Table 1.

Author-reported evaluation · Evaluation metadata: source checked

0.82612 auroc

Unit: fraction · Direction: higher

Uncertainty: Not reported

Scored: Not reported · Eligible: Not reported

source checkedpfmbench primary benchmark evidence · Table 3, row(ProTrek [ 56 ]), column(Clo. CLF)

Source checking is not independent reproduction.

ProtST on PFMBench CLONING-CLF: Cloning CLF

Fine-tuned with an adapter under the PFMBench harness; train, validation and test counts are in Table 1.

Author-reported evaluation · Evaluation metadata: source checked

0.80714 auroc

Unit: fraction · Direction: higher

Uncertainty: Not reported

Scored: Not reported · Eligible: Not reported

source checkedpfmbench primary benchmark evidence · Table 3, row(ProtST [ 71 ]), column(Clo. CLF)

Source checking is not independent reproduction.

ProtT5 on PFMBench CLONING-CLF: Cloning CLF

Fine-tuned with an adapter under the PFMBench harness; train, validation and test counts are in Table 1.

Author-reported evaluation · Evaluation metadata: source checked

0.78485 auroc

Unit: fraction · Direction: higher

Uncertainty: Not reported

Scored: Not reported · Eligible: Not reported

source checkedpfmbench primary benchmark evidence · Table 3, row(ProtT5 [ 11 ]), column(Clo. CLF)

Source checking is not independent reproduction.

SaProt on PFMBench CLONING-CLF: Cloning CLF

Fine-tuned with an adapter under the PFMBench harness; train, validation and test counts are in Table 1.

Author-reported evaluation · Evaluation metadata: source checked

0.81206 auroc

Unit: fraction · Direction: higher

Uncertainty: Not reported

Scored: Not reported · Eligible: Not reported

source checkedpfmbench primary benchmark evidence · Table 3, row(SaProt [ 55 ]), column(Clo. CLF)

Source checking is not independent reproduction.

VenusPLM on PFMBench CLONING-CLF: Cloning CLF

Fine-tuned with an adapter under the PFMBench harness; train, validation and test counts are in Table 1.

Author-reported evaluation · Evaluation metadata: source checked

0 .83172 auroc

Unit: fraction · Direction: higher

Uncertainty: Not reported

Scored: Not reported · Eligible: Not reported

source checkedpfmbench primary benchmark evidence · Table 3, row(VenusPLM [ 59 ]), column(Clo. CLF)

Source checking is not independent reproduction.

Evidence table

Inspect claims, sources and review details

Trace each statement to its source and review. A context-only reference supports the record generally; it does not verify an individual field. Source checking does not reproduce an experiment.

One row per statement and cited source. Multiple citations are not independent evaluations. Shared locators are labelled explicitly.

1 evidence row matching the loaded filters

Claims, original sources and review scope · Release 2026-09-17-134cd1815de8
Property and statementOriginal source and locationReview and provenance
Relationship: part of

discovery-benchmark-pfmbench

Individual claims
pfmbench primary benchmark evidence

Original source ↗

Table 1, row(Cloning CLF)

Version: 2506.14796v1
Retrieved: 2026-09-16T21:06:29.716004+00:00

source checked

automated source review · 2026-09-18

Audit details

Primary-source transcription with no human sign-off and no independent reproduction.

Field: links:part_of:discovery-benchmark-pfmbench

Claim: pfmbench-association-cloning-clf

Source artifact SHA-256: 59c7bbb888e8e91f33c1e2cabfde062c32381d6ca727d23b6655c977aabf97a2

Hash scope: Exact retrieved primary paper artifact bytes.

Inspected artifact

Sources and history

Release 2026-09-17-134cd1815de8 · Record review: source checked

1 source records and release historyDownload this release
Technical metadata and extraction receipts

Stable ID: pfmbench-task-cloning-clf

areas
proteins-complexes
tasks
Cloning CLF
metric
AUROC
metric direction
higher
dataset
Cloning CLF
protocol
Fine-tuned with an adapter under the PFMBench harness; train, validation and test counts are in Table 1.
source locator
Table 1, row(Cloning CLF)
comparison panels
id: pfmbench-panel-cloning-clf; title: PFMBench CLONING-CLF: Cloning CLF; protocol id: pfmbench-task-cloning-clf; dataset id: pfmbench-dataset-cloning-clf; metric: auroc; unit: fraction; direction: higher; result ids: pfmbench-result-esm-2-cloning-clf-auroc; pfmbench-result-venusplm-cloning-clf-auroc; pfmbench-result-esm-c-cloning-clf-auroc; pfmbench-result-protgpt2-cloning-clf-auroc; pfmbench-result-pglm-cloning-clf-auroc; pfmbench-result-prott5-cloning-clf-auroc; pfmbench-result-dplm-cloning-clf-auroc; pfmbench-result-saprot-cloning-clf-auroc; pfmbench-result-prostt5-cloning-clf-auroc; pfmbench-result-protst-cloning-clf-auroc; pfmbench-result-esm3-cloning-clf-auroc; pfmbench-result-protrek-cloning-clf-auroc; source ids: expansion-p3-pfmbench; source locator: Table 1, row(Cloning CLF); context: Every method PFMBench reports on Cloning CLF, scored with AUROC on Cloning CLF.; caveats: Author-reported numbers, source checked but not independently reproduced.; The metric differs by task, taken from Table 1, so these figures cannot be averaged into one score.; Table 3 scores come from adapter fine-tuning; the ProteinGym figure is zero-shot and is not comparable to them.; review: method: automated_source_review; date: 2026-09-18
Related records

Suggest a correction