经验建模与机制建模:将人工神经网络与基于机制的模型进行比较,以确定巴比妥类同源系列的定量结构-药代动力学关系。

AAPS pharmSci Pub Date : 1999-01-01 DOI:10.1208/ps010417
I S Nestorov, S T Hadjitodorov, I Petrov, M Rowland
{"title":"经验建模与机制建模:将人工神经网络与基于机制的模型进行比较,以确定巴比妥类同源系列的定量结构-药代动力学关系。","authors":"I S Nestorov, S T Hadjitodorov, I Petrov, M Rowland","doi":"10.1208/ps010417","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>The aim of the current study was to compare the predictive performance of a mechanistically based model and an empirical artificial neural network (ANN) model to describe the relationship between the tissue-to-unbound plasma concentration ratios (Kpu's) of 14 rat tissues and the lipophilicity (LogP) of a series of nine 5-n-alkyl-5-ethyl barbituric acids. The mechanistic model comprised the water content, binding capacity, number of the binding sites, and binding association constant of each tissue. A backpropagation ANN with 2 hidden layers (33 neurons in the first layer, 9 neurons in the second) was used for the comparison. The network was trained by an algorithm with adaptive momentum and learning rate, programmed using the ANN Toolbox of MATLAB. The predictive performance of both models was evaluated using a leave-one-out procedure and computation of both the mean prediction error (ME, showing the prediction bias) and the mean squared prediction error (MSE, showing the prediction accuracy). The ME of the mechanistic model was 18% (range, 20 to 57%), indicating a tendency for overprediction; the MSE is 32% (range, 6 to 104%). The ANN had almost no bias: the ME was 2% (range, 36 to 64%) and had greater precision than the mechanistic model, MSE 18% (range, 4 to 70%). Generally, neither model appeared to be a significantly better predictor of the Kpu's in the rat.</p>","PeriodicalId":101359,"journal":{"name":"AAPS pharmSci","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"1999-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2751347/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Empirical versus mechanistic modelling: comparison of an artificial neural network to a mechanistically based model for quantitative structure pharmacokinetic relationships of a homologous series of barbiturates.\",\"authors\":\"I S Nestorov, S T Hadjitodorov, I Petrov, M Rowland\",\"doi\":\"10.1208/ps010417\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><p>The aim of the current study was to compare the predictive performance of a mechanistically based model and an empirical artificial neural network (ANN) model to describe the relationship between the tissue-to-unbound plasma concentration ratios (Kpu's) of 14 rat tissues and the lipophilicity (LogP) of a series of nine 5-n-alkyl-5-ethyl barbituric acids. The mechanistic model comprised the water content, binding capacity, number of the binding sites, and binding association constant of each tissue. A backpropagation ANN with 2 hidden layers (33 neurons in the first layer, 9 neurons in the second) was used for the comparison. The network was trained by an algorithm with adaptive momentum and learning rate, programmed using the ANN Toolbox of MATLAB. The predictive performance of both models was evaluated using a leave-one-out procedure and computation of both the mean prediction error (ME, showing the prediction bias) and the mean squared prediction error (MSE, showing the prediction accuracy). The ME of the mechanistic model was 18% (range, 20 to 57%), indicating a tendency for overprediction; the MSE is 32% (range, 6 to 104%). The ANN had almost no bias: the ME was 2% (range, 36 to 64%) and had greater precision than the mechanistic model, MSE 18% (range, 4 to 70%). Generally, neither model appeared to be a significantly better predictor of the Kpu's in the rat.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":101359,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"AAPS pharmSci\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"1999-01-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2751347/pdf/\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"AAPS pharmSci\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1208/ps010417\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"AAPS pharmSci","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1208/ps010417","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

本研究的目的是比较基于机制的模型和经验人工神经网络(ANN)模型的预测性能,以描述14个大鼠组织的组织与未结合血浆浓度比(Kpu’s)与一系列9种5-n-烷基-5-乙基巴比妥酸的亲脂性(LogP)之间的关系。该机制模型包括每个组织的含水量、结合能力、结合位点的数量和结合结合常数。使用具有2个隐藏层(第一层33个神经元,第二层9个神经元)的反向传播ANN进行比较。该网络采用具有自适应动量和学习率的算法进行训练,并使用MATLAB的ANN工具箱进行编程。使用留一过程和平均预测误差(ME,显示预测偏差)和均方预测误差(MSE,显示预测精度)的计算来评估两个模型的预测性能。机制模型的ME为18%(范围为20-57%),表明有过度预测的趋势;MSE为32%(范围为6至104%)。ANN几乎没有偏差:ME为2%(范围,36-64%),并且比机械模型的MSE 18%(范围,4-70%)具有更高的精度。一般来说,这两种模型似乎都不是大鼠Kpu的更好预测指标。
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
Empirical versus mechanistic modelling: comparison of an artificial neural network to a mechanistically based model for quantitative structure pharmacokinetic relationships of a homologous series of barbiturates.

The aim of the current study was to compare the predictive performance of a mechanistically based model and an empirical artificial neural network (ANN) model to describe the relationship between the tissue-to-unbound plasma concentration ratios (Kpu's) of 14 rat tissues and the lipophilicity (LogP) of a series of nine 5-n-alkyl-5-ethyl barbituric acids. The mechanistic model comprised the water content, binding capacity, number of the binding sites, and binding association constant of each tissue. A backpropagation ANN with 2 hidden layers (33 neurons in the first layer, 9 neurons in the second) was used for the comparison. The network was trained by an algorithm with adaptive momentum and learning rate, programmed using the ANN Toolbox of MATLAB. The predictive performance of both models was evaluated using a leave-one-out procedure and computation of both the mean prediction error (ME, showing the prediction bias) and the mean squared prediction error (MSE, showing the prediction accuracy). The ME of the mechanistic model was 18% (range, 20 to 57%), indicating a tendency for overprediction; the MSE is 32% (range, 6 to 104%). The ANN had almost no bias: the ME was 2% (range, 36 to 64%) and had greater precision than the mechanistic model, MSE 18% (range, 4 to 70%). Generally, neither model appeared to be a significantly better predictor of the Kpu's in the rat.

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
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
期刊最新文献
Evaluation of a new coprocessed compound based on lactose and maize starch for tablet formulation. Evaluation of the potential use of poly(ethylene oxide) as tablet- and extrudate-forming material. Permeability classification of representative fluoroquinolones by a cell culture method. Empirical versus mechanistic modelling: comparison of an artificial neural network to a mechanistically based model for quantitative structure pharmacokinetic relationships of a homologous series of barbiturates.
×
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