Target‐Driven Subspace Mapping Methods and Their Applicability Domain Estimation
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This work describes a methodology for assisting virtual screening of drugs during the early stages of the drug development process. This methodology is proposed to improve the reliability of in silico property prediction and it is structured in two steps. Firstly, a transformation is sought for mapping a high-dimensional space defined by potentially redundant or irrelevant molecular descriptors into a low-dimensional application-related space. For this task we evaluate three different target-driven subspace mapping methods, out of which we highlight the recent Correlative Matrix Mapping (CMM) as the most stable. Secondly, we apply an applicability domain model on the low-dimensional space for assessing confidentiality of compound classification. By a probabilistic framework the applicability domain approach identifies poorly represented compounds in the training set (extrapolation problems) and regions in the space where the uncertainty about the correct class is higher than normal (interpolation problems). This two-step approach represents an important contribution to the development of confident prediction tools in the chemoinformatics area, where the field is in need of both interpretable models and methods that estimate the confidence of predictions.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it