MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2129893339 · doi:10.1021/ci034143r

Spline-Fitting with a Genetic Algorithm:  A Method for Developing Classification Structure−Activity Relationships

2003· article· en· W2129893339 on OpenAlex

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.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Chemical Information and Computer Sciences · 2003
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicComputational Drug Discovery Methods
Canadian institutionsQueen's UniversityDalhousie University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsArtificial intelligenceTest setCategorical variableStability (learning theory)MathematicsMolecular descriptorSet (abstract data type)Training setPattern recognition (psychology)Quantitative structure–activity relationshipComputer scienceMachine learning

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Classification methods allow for the development of structure-activity relationship models when the target property is categorical rather than continuous. We describe a classification method which fits descriptor splines to activities, with descriptors selected using a genetic algorithm. This method, which we identify as SFGA, is compared to the well-established techniques of recursive partitioning (RP) and soft independent modeling by class analogy (SIMCA) using five series of compounds: cyclooxygenase-2 (COX-2) inhibitors, benzodiazepine receptor (BZR) ligands, estrogen receptor (ER) ligands, dihydrofolate reductase (DHFR) inhibitors, and monoamine oxidase (MAO) inhibitors. Only 1-D and 2-D descriptors were used. Approximately 40% of compounds in each series were assigned to a test set, "cherry-picked" from the complete set such that they lie outside the training set as much as possible. SFGA produced models that were more predictive for all but the DHFR set, for which SIMCA was most predictive. RP gave the least predictive models for all but the MAO set. A similar trend was observed when using training and test sets to which compounds were randomly assigned and when gradually eliminating compounds from the (designed) training set. The stability of models was examined for the random and reduced sets, where stability means that classification statistics and the selected descriptors are similar for models derived from different sets. Here, SIMCA produced the most stable models, followed by SFGA and RP. We show that a consensus approach that combines all three methods outperforms the single best model for all data sets.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: Methods
Teacher disagreement score0.946
Threshold uncertainty score0.410

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.002
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.053
GPT teacher head0.326
Teacher spread0.273 · 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