Install any skill in seconds. Free to start, no credit card required.
Get Started Free →Dose-response / concentration-response curve fitting — IC50, EC50, Hill slope, Emax/Emin efficacy, and relative potency from paired concentration vs response data (enzyme/cell assays, drug screening, agonist/antagonist pharmacology). Fits the 4-parameter logistic (Hill sigmoidal) model. Use when you have concentrations + responses and need a potency value, to compare two compounds' potency, or to judge curve quality. NOT for image-derived dose-response (use tooluniverse-image-analysis) and NOT f
.claude/skills/tooluniverse-dose-response/SKILL.md| Test case | Without → With | Effect | Δ tokens | Δ turns |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| case-06 | ✗→✓ | ▲ Improved | — | — |
| case-02 | ✗→✓ | ▲ Improved | — | — |
| case-19 | ✗→✓ | ▲ Improved | — | — |
| case-05 | ✗→✓ | ▲ Improved | — | — |
| case-15 | ✗→✓ | ▲ Improved | — | — |
Turn paired concentration vs response measurements into a potency (IC50/EC50), a Hill slope, an efficacy (Emax), and a quality judgment — and compare potency between compounds.
The model is the 4-parameter logistic (4PL) / Hill sigmoidal: f(x) = Emin + (Emax − Emin) / (1 + (EC50/x)^n) — where n is the Hill slope.
| Issue | What to do | |---|---| | Concentration units | Pick ONE unit (µM, nM, M) and use it for every point. The IC50 comes back in that unit. Don't mix. | | Log vs linear concentrations | Pass concentrations on the linear scale (e.g. 0.01, 0.1, 1, 10), not log10. The fitter logs internally. | | Zero/control concentration | Drop a literal 0 concentration (log(0) is undefined). Keep it only as the Emin/Emax reference if normalizing. | | Direction | Inhibition curves go high→low (IC50); activation curves go low→high (EC50). The tools handle both; just be consistent. | | Normalization | Convert raw signal to % of control if you want Emax/Emin near 100/0: % = 100 × (raw − blank)/(control − blank). Raw values also fit, but plateaus are then in raw units. | | Replicates | Average technical replicates per concentration before fitting, or pass all points (the fit weights them equally). |
Coverage requirement: you need ≥4 points (the tools require it) and ideally 6–8 spanning both plateaus — points clearly above and clearly below the inflection. A curve that never plateaus gives an unreliable, extrapolated IC50 (see Step 4).
Single curve → IC50 or EC50 (same math; "IC50" for inhibition, "EC50" for activation):
bashtu run DoseResponse_calculate_ic50 '{"operation":"calculate_ic50", "concentrations":[0.001,0.01,0.1,1,10,100], "responses":[98,95,80,45,12,3]}'
Returns ic50, ic50_95_confidence_interval, hill_slope, emax, emin, r_squared, log_ic50.
Full 4PL parameters only → DoseResponse_fit_curve (same inputs). Two compounds → DoseResponse_compare_potency with conc_a/resp_a/conc_b/resp_b (returns each IC50 + ic50_fold_shift_b_over_a + more_potent).
For non-standard needs (constrained plateaus, weighting, plotting), scripts/fit_dose_response.py runs a scipy 4PL fit from a CSV and matches the tool.
| Parameter | Meaning | Sanity check | |---|---|---| | IC50 / EC50 | Concentration giving half-maximal effect — the potency. Lower = more potent. | Should fall within your tested range; if it's at/beyond an endpoint, the curve is incomplete (Step 4). | | Hill slope n | Steepness / apparent cooperativity. ~1 = simple one-site. >1.5 = steep/positive cooperativity (or non-specific). <0.5 = shallow/multiple sites or heterogeneity. | A wildly large |n| (>4) usually means a bad fit or too few transition points, not real cooperativity. | | Emax | Maximal response (top plateau) = efficacy. | For % data, full agonist ≈100; a partial agonist plateaus well below 100 even at saturating dose. | | Emin | Bottom plateau (baseline/floor). | For % inhibition data, ≈0 for a complete inhibitor. | | r² | Fit quality. | ≥0.95 good; <0.90 → inspect for outliers, wrong model, or incomplete curve before trusting the IC50. |
Potency comparison: report the fold-shift in IC50/EC50 (e.g. "A is 6.2× more potent than B"), and only call it meaningful if both fits are good (r²≥0.95) and the Hill slopes are comparable — a potency ratio between curves of very different slope is not a clean comparison.
tooluniverse-image-analysis — dose-response on image-derived measurements (.tif, colony, fluorescence).tooluniverse-gpcr-structural-pharmacology / tooluniverse-network-pharmacology — receptor pharmacology context.tooluniverse-statistical-modeling — general regression, EC50 via spline, power analysis.| Case | Status | Duration (ms) | Turns | Tokens | Tool calls | ||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Without | With | Δ | Without | With | Δ | Without | With | Δ | Without | With | Δ | ||
case-07 | fail→fail | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
case-09 | fail→fail | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
case-08 | fail→fail | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
case-06 | fail→pass | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
case-20 | fail→fail | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
case-17 | fail→fail | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
case-22 | fail→fail | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
case-18 | fail→fail | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
case-02 | fail→pass | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
case-11 | fail→fail | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
case-10 | fail→fail | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
case-03 | pass→pass | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
case-19 | fail→pass | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
case-23 | fail→fail | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
case-05 | fail→pass | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
case-12 | fail→fail | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
case-01 | fail→fail | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
case-04 | fail→fail | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
case-13 | fail→fail | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
case-14 | fail→fail | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
case-15 | fail→pass | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
case-16 | fail→fail | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
case-21 | fail→fail | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
DecimalAI ran this skill against gemini-3.6-flash twice over the same eval suite — once with the skill loaded and once without — and compared the two runs case by case. 23 cases were attempted, and 22 counted toward the lift figure. The other 1 produced results that are not comparable between the two arms, so they are excluded from the headline rather than averaged into it. The headline lift of +22 percentage points is the difference between those two pass rates over the 22 comparable cases.
The per-case answers from this run were removed by the retention sweep, so the case table below shows the verdicts without the text either arm produced. The counts above were recorded at the time and are unaffected. Answers are now kept for 180 days.
Other measured skills in the registry, with their headline benchmark lift.