MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W2124861384 · doi:10.1139/cjc-2012-0379

QSAR studies for the computational prediction of HMG-CoA reductase inhibitors by genetic function approximation technique

2012· article· en· W2124861384 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Mohamed K. Awad, Eman A. El-Bastawissy, Faten M. Atlam

Bibliographic record

VenueCanadian Journal of Chemistry · 2012
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicComputational Drug Discovery Methods
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsQuantitative structure–activity relationshipChemistryLinear regressionCorrelation coefficientCross-validationPartial least squares regressionBiological systemStereochemistryArtificial intelligenceMachine learningComputer science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Two-dimensional quantitative structure−activity relationship (2D-QSAR) models are useful in understanding how chemical structure is related to the biological activity of natural and synthetic chemicals. Also, they could be usefully employed for designing newer and better therapeutics. A 2D-QSAR study was performed for 52 compounds of a series of thiophenyl quinolines and α-asarone derivatives as potential hypocholesterolemic inhibitors using different types of physicochemical descriptors, which correlated significantly with the activity. Linear QSAR models were developed using multiple linear regression, where the genetic algorithm (genetic function approximation technique) was adopted for selecting the most appropriate descriptors. The results are discussed on the basis of regression data and the cross-validation technique. Model A is the best 2D-QSAR model describing the inhibition efficiency of HMG-CoA reductase with cross-validated squared correlation coefficient (Q 2 = 0.700) and the squared correlation coefficient (R 2 = 0.752), which is able to describe 70% of the variance in the experimental activity. The good agreement between the experimental and the predicted values of pIC50 (micromoles per litre) (R = 0.876) confirms the reliability and the predictability of the proposed model. The results obtained from the present QSAR study explained the importance of the electronic, structural, spatial, and electrotopological descriptors in enhancing the biological activity of the investigated inhibitors.

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.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.003
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.010
Threshold uncertainty score0.019

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.025
GPT teacher head0.270
Teacher spread0.245 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designSimulation or modeling
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations6
Published2012
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCanadian Journal of Chemistry→Same topicComputational Drug Discovery Methods→French-language works237,207→