Deep learning expands the chemical space accessible to antibiotic discovery, making interpretation of evaluation results increasingly important when only a few compounds can be prioritized from vast candidate libraries. AUPRC depends on test-set prevalence, while molecular splitting can alter training-to-test structural relatedness and test-set class composition, so when prevalence differs across splits, a cross-split AUPRC difference alone cannot quantify how much of the performance change is attributable to structural differences. Cross-split comparisons should therefore report test-set size, positive count, prevalence, splitting method, and the precision-recall summary metric, while direct model comparisons should use the same fixed independent test set whenever possible. Claims about practical screening utility should also consider top-k performance, early enrichment metrics, or prospective experimental hit rates under a prespecified budget, so that evidence remains aligned with the scientific claims it is intended to support.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Pan et al. (2026) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: