MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2135817448 · doi:10.1038/sj.bjp.0707515

Towards the development of universal, fast and highly accurate docking/scoring methods: a long way to go

2007· review· en· W2135817448 on OpenAlexafffund
Nicolas Moitessier, Pablo Englebienne, Do Ryun Lee, Janice Lawandi, Christopher R. Corbeil

Bibliographic record

VenueBritish Journal of Pharmacology · 2007
Typereview
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicComputational Drug Discovery Methods
Canadian institutionsMcGill University
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of CanadaCanadian Institutes of Health Research
KeywordsDocking (animal)Computer scienceVirtual screeningDrug discoveryDrug developmentData scienceMachine learningArtificial intelligenceBioinformaticsDrugPharmacologyMedicineBiology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Accelerating the drug discovery process requires predictive computational protocols capable of reducing or simplifying the synthetic and/or combinatorial challenge. Docking-based virtual screening methods have been developed and successfully applied to a number of pharmaceutical targets. In this review, we first present the current status of docking and scoring methods, with exhaustive lists of these. We next discuss reported comparative studies, outlining criteria for their interpretation. In the final section, we describe some of the remaining developments that would potentially lead to a universally applicable docking/scoring method.

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)0.005
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.005
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.005
Threshold uncertainty score0.024

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0050.005
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0030.001
Bibliometrics0.0020.003
Science and technology studies0.0000.002
Scholarly communication0.0020.004
Open science0.0030.001
Research integrity0.0020.005
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.004

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 head0.116
GPT teacher head0.448
Teacher spread0.332 · 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 designTheoretical or conceptual
Domainnot available
GenreReview

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

Citations509
Published2007
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueBritish Journal of PharmacologySame topicComputational Drug Discovery MethodsFrench-language works237,207