Toward a Robust Search Method for the Protein-Drug Docking Problem
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Predicting the binding mode(s) of a drug molecule to a target receptor is pivotal in structure-based rational drug design. In contrast to most approaches to solve this problem, the idea in this paper is to analyze the search problem from a computational perspective. By building on top of an existing docking tool, new methods are proposed and relevant computational results are proven. These methods and results are applicable for other place-and-join frameworks as well. A fast approximation scheme for the docking of rigid fragments is described that guarantees certain geometric approximation factors. It is also demonstrated that this can be translated into an energy approximation for simple scoring functions. A polynomial time algorithm is developed for the matching phase of the docked rigid fragments. It is demonstrated that the generic matching problem is NP-hard. At the same time, the optimality of the proposed algorithm is proven under certain scoring function conditions. The matching results are also applicable for some of the fragment-based de novo design methods. On the practical side, the proposed method is tested on 829 complexes from the PDB. The results show that the closest predicted pose to the native structure has the average RMS deviation of 1.06 A.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.003 | 0.008 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.003 | 0.003 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.004 | 0.002 |
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 itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".