MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3089522160 · doi:10.26434/chemrxiv.12548003.v1

Computational Design of Potent Inhibitors for SARS-CoV-2’s Main Protease

2020· preprint· en· W3089522160 on OpenAlexafffund
Abd Al‐Aziz A. Abu‐Saleh, Ibrahim E. Awad, Arpita Yadav, Raymond A. Poirier

Bibliographic record

VenueChemRxiv · 2020
Typepreprint
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicComputational Drug Discovery Methods
Canadian institutionsMemorial University of Newfoundland
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of CanadaMemorial University of NewfoundlandScience and Engineering Research BoardCompute CanadaShastri Indo-Canadian Institute
KeywordsDrugBankVirtual screeningIn silicoDocking (animal)Computational biologychEMBLSevere acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2)Drug discoveryProteaseDrugChemistryCoronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19)PharmacologyBiologyMedicineBiochemistryEnzymeInfectious disease (medical specialty)

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In silico drug design can play a vital role in identifying promising drug candidates against COVID-19. Herein, we focused on the main protease of SARS-CoV-2 that plays crucial biological functions in the virus. We performed a ligand-based virtual screening followed by a docking screening for testing approved drugs and bioactive compounds listed in the DrugBank and ChEMBL databases. The top 8 docking results were advanced to all-atom MD simulations to study the relative stability of the protein-ligand interactions.Our results suggest several promising approved and bioactive inhibitors of SARS-CoV-2 Mpro.

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)0.001
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: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.004
Threshold uncertainty score0.009

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.000

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 head0.096
GPT teacher head0.339
Teacher spread0.243 · 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

Citations3
Published2020
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueChemRxivSame topicComputational Drug Discovery MethodsFrench-language works237,207