MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4210933066 · doi:10.1021/acs.jcim.1c00701

Docking Ligands into Flexible and Solvated Macromolecules. 8. Forming New Bonds─Challenges and Opportunities

2022· article· en· W4210933066 on OpenAlexafffund
Anne Labarre, Julia Stille, Mihai Burai Patrascu, Andrew Martins, Joshua Pottel, Nicolas Moitessier

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Chemical Information and Modeling · 2022
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicComputational Drug Discovery Methods
Canadian institutionsMcGill University
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of CanadaCanadian Institutes of Health Research
KeywordsDocking (animal)DOCKDrug discoveryMacromoleculeSmall moleculeCovalent bondChemistryHydrogen bondComputer scienceCombinatorial chemistryComputational biologyStructural bioinformaticsMoleculeNanotechnologyProtein structureBiochemistryMaterials scienceBiologyOrganic chemistry

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Over the years, structure-based design programs and specifically docking small molecules to proteins have become prominent in drug discovery. However, many of these computational tools have been developed to primarily dock enzyme inhibitors (and ligands to other protein classes) relying heavily on hydrogen bonds and electrostatic and hydrophobic interactions. In reality, many drug targets either feature metal ions, can be targeted covalently, or are simply not even proteins (e.g., nucleic acids). Herein, we describe several new features that we have implemented into Fitted to broaden its applicability to a wide range of covalent enzyme inhibitors and to metalloenzymes, where metal coordination is essential for drug binding. This updated version of our docking program was tested for its ability to predict the correct binding mode of drug-sized molecules in a large variety of proteins. We also report new datasets that were essential to demonstrate areas of success and those where additional efforts are required. This resource could be used by other program developers to assess their own software.

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 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: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.845
Threshold uncertainty score0.326

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
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 head0.081
GPT teacher head0.302
Teacher spread0.221 · 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 teacher head, 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

Citations15
Published2022
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Chemical Information and ModelingSame topicComputational Drug Discovery MethodsFrench-language works237,207