Drug Discovery in the Age of Artificial Intelligence: Transformative Target-Based Approaches
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The complexities inherent in drug development are multi-faceted and often hamper accuracy, speed and efficiency, thereby limiting success. This review explores how recent developments in machine learning (ML) are significantly impacting target-based drug discovery, particularly in small-molecule approaches. The Simplified Molecular Input Line Entry System (SMILES), which translates a chemical compound's three-dimensional structure into a string of symbols, is now widely used in drug design, mining, and repurposing. Utilizing ML and natural language processing techniques, SMILES has revolutionized lead identification, high-throughput screening and virtual screening. ML models enhance the accuracy of predicting binding affinity and selectivity, reducing the need for extensive experimental screening. Additionally, deep learning, with its strengths in analyzing spatial and sequential data through convolutional neural networks (CNNs) and recurrent neural networks (RNNs), shows promise for virtual screening, target identification, and de novo drug design. Fragment-based approaches also benefit from ML algorithms and techniques like generative adversarial networks (GANs), which predict fragment properties and binding affinities, aiding in hit selection and design optimization. Structure-based drug design, which relies on high-resolution protein structures, leverages ML models for accurate predictions of binding interactions. While challenges such as interpretability and data quality remain, ML's transformative impact accelerates target-based drug discovery, increasing efficiency and innovation. Its potential to deliver new and improved treatments for various diseases is significant.
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 | 0.003 | 0.004 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.003 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.003 | 0.005 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.005 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 0.002 |
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".