Deep Docking - a Deep Learning Approach for Virtual Screening of Big Chemical Datasets
Bibliographic record
Abstract
ABSTRACT Drug discovery is an extensive and rigorous process that requires up to 2 billion dollars of investments and more than ten years of research and development to bring a molecule “from bench to a bedside”. While virtual screening can significantly enhance drug discovery workflow, it ultimately lags the current rate of expansion of chemical databases that already incorporate billions of purchasable compounds. This surge of available small molecules presents great opportunities for drug discovery but also demands for faster virtual screening methods and protocols. In order to address this challenge, we herein introduce Deep Docking ( D 2 ) - a novel deep learning-based approach which is suited for docking billions of molecular structures. The developed D 2 -platform utilizes quantitative structure-activity relationship (QSAR) based deep models trained on docking scores of subsets of a large chemical library (Big Base) to approximate the docking outcome for yet unprocessed molecular entries and to remove unfavorable structures in an iterative manner. We applied D 2 to virtually screen 1.36 billion molecules form the ZINC15 library against 12 prominent target proteins, and demonstrated up to 100-fold chemical data reduction and 6,000-fold enrichment for top hits, without notable loss of well-docked entities. The developed D 2 protocol can readily be used in conjunction with any docking program and was made publicly available.
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 | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.004 | 0.001 |
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".