分子 pKi 预测中的主动学习方法。

IF 2.8 4区 医学 Q3 CHEMISTRY, MEDICINAL Molecular Informatics Pub Date : 2024-08-06 DOI:10.1002/minf.202400154
I M Kashafutdinova, A Poyezzhayeva, T Gimadiev, T Madzhidov
{"title":"分子 pKi 预测中的主动学习方法。","authors":"I M Kashafutdinova, A Poyezzhayeva, T Gimadiev, T Madzhidov","doi":"10.1002/minf.202400154","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>During the early stages of drug design, identifying compounds with suitable bioactivities is crucial. Given the vast array of potential drug databases, it's feasible to assay only a limited subset of candidates. The optimal method for selecting the candidates, aiming to minimize the overall number of assays, involves an active learning (AL) approach. In this work, we benchmarked a range of AL strategies with two main objectives: (1) to identify a strategy that ensures high model performance and (2) to select molecules with desired properties using minimal assays. To evaluate the different AL strategies, we employed the simulated AL workflow based on \"virtual\" experiments. These experiments leveraged ChEMBL datasets, which come with known biological activity values for the molecules. Furthermore, for classification tasks, we proposed the hybrid selection strategy that unified both exploration and exploitation AL strategies into a single acquisition function, defined by parameters n and c. We have also shown that popular minimal margin and maximal variance selection approaches for exploration selection correspond to minimization of the hybrid acquisition function with n=1 and 2 respectively. The balance between the exploration and exploitation strategies can be adjusted using a coefficient (c), making the optimal strategy selection straightforward. The primary strength of the hybrid selection method lies in its adaptability; it offers the flexibility to adjust the criteria for molecule selection based on the specific task by modifying the value of the contribution coefficient. Our analysis revealed that, in regression tasks, AL strategies didn't succeed at ensuring high model performance, however, they were successful in selecting molecules with desired properties using minimal number of tests. In analogous experiments in classification tasks, exploration strategy and the hybrid selection function with a constant c<1 (for n=1) and c≤0.2 (for n=2) were effective in achieving the goal of constructing a high-performance predictive model using minimal data. When searching for molecules with desired properties, exploitation, and the hybrid function with c≥1 (n=1) and c≥0.7 (n=2) demonstrated efficiency identifying molecules in fewer iterations compared to random selection method. Notably, when the hybrid function was set to an intermediate coefficient value (c=0.7), it successfully addressed both tasks simultaneously.</p>","PeriodicalId":18853,"journal":{"name":"Molecular Informatics","volume":" ","pages":"e202400154"},"PeriodicalIF":2.8000,"publicationDate":"2024-08-06","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Active learning approaches in molecule pKi prediction.\",\"authors\":\"I M Kashafutdinova, A Poyezzhayeva, T Gimadiev, T Madzhidov\",\"doi\":\"10.1002/minf.202400154\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><p>During the early stages of drug design, identifying compounds with suitable bioactivities is crucial. Given the vast array of potential drug databases, it's feasible to assay only a limited subset of candidates. The optimal method for selecting the candidates, aiming to minimize the overall number of assays, involves an active learning (AL) approach. In this work, we benchmarked a range of AL strategies with two main objectives: (1) to identify a strategy that ensures high model performance and (2) to select molecules with desired properties using minimal assays. To evaluate the different AL strategies, we employed the simulated AL workflow based on \\\"virtual\\\" experiments. These experiments leveraged ChEMBL datasets, which come with known biological activity values for the molecules. Furthermore, for classification tasks, we proposed the hybrid selection strategy that unified both exploration and exploitation AL strategies into a single acquisition function, defined by parameters n and c. We have also shown that popular minimal margin and maximal variance selection approaches for exploration selection correspond to minimization of the hybrid acquisition function with n=1 and 2 respectively. The balance between the exploration and exploitation strategies can be adjusted using a coefficient (c), making the optimal strategy selection straightforward. The primary strength of the hybrid selection method lies in its adaptability; it offers the flexibility to adjust the criteria for molecule selection based on the specific task by modifying the value of the contribution coefficient. Our analysis revealed that, in regression tasks, AL strategies didn't succeed at ensuring high model performance, however, they were successful in selecting molecules with desired properties using minimal number of tests. In analogous experiments in classification tasks, exploration strategy and the hybrid selection function with a constant c<1 (for n=1) and c≤0.2 (for n=2) were effective in achieving the goal of constructing a high-performance predictive model using minimal data. When searching for molecules with desired properties, exploitation, and the hybrid function with c≥1 (n=1) and c≥0.7 (n=2) demonstrated efficiency identifying molecules in fewer iterations compared to random selection method. Notably, when the hybrid function was set to an intermediate coefficient value (c=0.7), it successfully addressed both tasks simultaneously.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":18853,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Molecular Informatics\",\"volume\":\" \",\"pages\":\"e202400154\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":2.8000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-08-06\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Molecular Informatics\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1002/minf.202400154\",\"RegionNum\":4,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q3\",\"JCRName\":\"CHEMISTRY, MEDICINAL\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Molecular Informatics","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1002/minf.202400154","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"CHEMISTRY, MEDICINAL","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

在药物设计的早期阶段,确定具有合适生物活性的化合物至关重要。鉴于潜在药物数据库数量庞大,因此只能对有限的候选化合物进行检测。选择候选化合物的最佳方法是主动学习(AL)方法,目的是最大限度地减少化验的总次数。在这项工作中,我们对一系列主动学习策略进行了基准测试,主要目的有两个:(1)确定一种能确保高模型性能的策略;(2)使用最少的化验选择具有所需特性的分子。为了评估不同的 AL 策略,我们采用了基于 "虚拟 "实验的模拟 AL 工作流程。这些实验利用了 ChEMBL 数据集,其中包含了已知分子的生物活性值。此外,针对分类任务,我们提出了混合选择策略,将探索和利用 AL 策略统一为一个单一的获取函数,该函数由参数 n 和 c 定义。我们还证明,用于探索选择的流行最小边际和最大方差选择方法分别对应于混合获取函数的最小化(n=1 和 2)。探索策略和开发策略之间的平衡可以通过系数(c)进行调整,从而使最优策略选择变得简单明了。混合选择方法的主要优势在于其适应性;它可以根据具体任务,通过修改贡献系数的值来灵活调整分子选择的标准。我们的分析表明,在回归任务中,AL 策略并不能成功地确保高模型性能,但却能用最少的测试次数成功地选择出具有所需特性的分子。在分类任务的类似实验中,探索策略和具有常数 c
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
Active learning approaches in molecule pKi prediction.

During the early stages of drug design, identifying compounds with suitable bioactivities is crucial. Given the vast array of potential drug databases, it's feasible to assay only a limited subset of candidates. The optimal method for selecting the candidates, aiming to minimize the overall number of assays, involves an active learning (AL) approach. In this work, we benchmarked a range of AL strategies with two main objectives: (1) to identify a strategy that ensures high model performance and (2) to select molecules with desired properties using minimal assays. To evaluate the different AL strategies, we employed the simulated AL workflow based on "virtual" experiments. These experiments leveraged ChEMBL datasets, which come with known biological activity values for the molecules. Furthermore, for classification tasks, we proposed the hybrid selection strategy that unified both exploration and exploitation AL strategies into a single acquisition function, defined by parameters n and c. We have also shown that popular minimal margin and maximal variance selection approaches for exploration selection correspond to minimization of the hybrid acquisition function with n=1 and 2 respectively. The balance between the exploration and exploitation strategies can be adjusted using a coefficient (c), making the optimal strategy selection straightforward. The primary strength of the hybrid selection method lies in its adaptability; it offers the flexibility to adjust the criteria for molecule selection based on the specific task by modifying the value of the contribution coefficient. Our analysis revealed that, in regression tasks, AL strategies didn't succeed at ensuring high model performance, however, they were successful in selecting molecules with desired properties using minimal number of tests. In analogous experiments in classification tasks, exploration strategy and the hybrid selection function with a constant c<1 (for n=1) and c≤0.2 (for n=2) were effective in achieving the goal of constructing a high-performance predictive model using minimal data. When searching for molecules with desired properties, exploitation, and the hybrid function with c≥1 (n=1) and c≥0.7 (n=2) demonstrated efficiency identifying molecules in fewer iterations compared to random selection method. Notably, when the hybrid function was set to an intermediate coefficient value (c=0.7), it successfully addressed both tasks simultaneously.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
Molecular Informatics
Molecular Informatics CHEMISTRY, MEDICINAL-MATHEMATICAL & COMPUTATIONAL BIOLOGY
CiteScore
7.30
自引率
2.80%
发文量
70
审稿时长
3 months
期刊介绍: Molecular Informatics is a peer-reviewed, international forum for publication of high-quality, interdisciplinary research on all molecular aspects of bio/cheminformatics and computer-assisted molecular design. Molecular Informatics succeeded QSAR & Combinatorial Science in 2010. Molecular Informatics presents methodological innovations that will lead to a deeper understanding of ligand-receptor interactions, macromolecular complexes, molecular networks, design concepts and processes that demonstrate how ideas and design concepts lead to molecules with a desired structure or function, preferably including experimental validation. The journal''s scope includes but is not limited to the fields of drug discovery and chemical biology, protein and nucleic acid engineering and design, the design of nanomolecular structures, strategies for modeling of macromolecular assemblies, molecular networks and systems, pharmaco- and chemogenomics, computer-assisted screening strategies, as well as novel technologies for the de novo design of biologically active molecules. As a unique feature Molecular Informatics publishes so-called "Methods Corner" review-type articles which feature important technological concepts and advances within the scope of the journal.
期刊最新文献
Interpret Gaussian Process Models by Using Integrated Gradients. The Chemical Space Spanned by Manually Curated Datasets of Natural and Synthetic Compounds with Activities against SARS-CoV-2. Extended Activity Cliffs-Driven Approaches on Data Splitting for the Study of Bioactivity Machine Learning Predictions. BIOMX-DB: A web application for the BIOFACQUIM natural product database. Chemoinformatics for corrosion science: Data-driven modeling of corrosion inhibition by organic molecules.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1