A review on computer‐aided chemogenomics and drug repositioning for rational<scp>COVID</scp>‐19 drug discovery
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Application of materials capable of energy harvesting to increase the efficiency and environmental adaptability is sometimes reflected in the ability of discovery of some traces in an environment-either experimentally or computationally-to enlarge practical application window. The emergence of computational methods, particularly computer-aided drug discovery (CADD), provides ample opportunities for the rapid discovery and development of unprecedented drugs. The expensive and time-consuming process of traditional drug discovery is no longer feasible, for nowadays the identification of potential drug candidates is much easier for therapeutic targets through elaborate in silico approaches, allowing the prediction of the toxicity of drugs, such as drug repositioning (DR) and chemical genomics (chemogenomics). Coronaviruses (CoVs) are cross-species viruses that are able to spread expeditiously from the into new host species, which in turn cause epidemic diseases. In this sense, this review furnishes an outline of computational strategies and their applications in drug discovery. A special focus is placed on chemogenomics and DR as unique and emerging system-based disciplines on CoV drug and target discovery to model protein networks against a library of compounds. Furthermore, to demonstrate the special advantages of CADD methods in rapidly finding a drug for this deadly virus, numerous examples of the recent achievements grounded on molecular docking, chemogenomics, and DR are reported, analyzed, and interpreted in detail. It is believed that the outcome of this review assists developers of energy harvesting materials and systems for detection of future unexpected kinds of CoVs or other variants.
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.
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.004 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.003 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it