MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4400951930 · doi:10.1016/j.mlwa.2024.100576

Supervised machine learning in drug discovery and development: Algorithms, applications, challenges, and prospects

2024· article· en· W4400951930 on OpenAlexaff
George Obaido, Ibomoiye Domor Mienye, Oluwaseun Francis Egbelowo, Ikiomoye Douglas Emmanuel, Adeola Ogunleye, Blessing Ogbuokiri, Pere Mienye, Kehinde Aruleba

Bibliographic record

VenueMachine Learning with Applications · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicComputational Drug Discovery Methods
Canadian institutionsBrock University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsDrug discoveryMachine learningComputer scienceArtificial intelligenceAlgorithmDrug developmentDevelopment (topology)DrugMathematicsBioinformaticsMedicineBiologyPharmacology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Drug discovery and development is a time-consuming process that involves identifying, designing, and testing new drugs to address critical medical needs. In recent years, machine learning (ML) has played a vital role in technological advancements and has shown promising results in various drug discovery and development stages. ML can be categorized into supervised, unsupervised, semi-supervised, and reinforcement learning. Supervised learning is the most used category, helping organizations solve several real-world problems. This study presents a comprehensive survey of supervised learning algorithms in drug design and development, focusing on their learning process and succinct mathematical formulations, which are lacking in the literature. Additionally, the study discusses widely encountered challenges in applying supervised learning for drug discovery and potential solutions. This study will be beneficial to researchers and practitioners in the pharmaceutical industry as it provides a simplified yet comprehensive review of the main concepts, algorithms, challenges, and prospects in supervised learning. • Conducted a survey of supervised learning algorithms in drug design and development. • Provided mathematical formulations of these algorithms, addressing a gap in literature. • Identified challenges in applying supervised learning to drug discovery with solutions. • Presented algorithm concepts, challenges, and prospects, aiding researchers and practitioners.

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)0.007
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.010
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.007
Threshold uncertainty score0.038

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0070.010
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0020.003
Science and technology studies0.0010.002
Scholarly communication0.0030.005
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0020.004
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.001

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.

Opus teacher head0.016
GPT teacher head0.266
Teacher spread0.250 · 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 designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreReview

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

Citations98
Published2024
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueMachine Learning with ApplicationsSame topicComputational Drug Discovery MethodsFrench-language works237,207