2015
DOI: 10.3109/14756366.2014.976566
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Compressed images for affinity prediction-2 (CIFAP-2): an improved machine learning methodology on protein–ligand interactions based on a study on caspase 3 inhibitors

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
3
1
1

Citation Types

0
23
0

Year Published

2017
2017
2021
2021

Publication Types

Select...
3

Relationship

2
1

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 3 publications
(23 citation statements)
references
References 29 publications
0
23
0
Order By: Relevance
“…Support vector regression and PLSR methods were applied to the resulting X‐, Y‐, Z‐, and XYZ‐feature vectors for predicting pIC 50 values of CHK1‐ligand interactions. In contrast with the previous versions of CIFAP examining that the linear regression models fit better to the features obtained from the compressed images of protein‐ligand complexes, the SVR with linear kernel was preferred for the prediction phase rather than the SVR with RBF kernel that was explained by Erdas et al A grid search using leave‐one‐out cross‐validation was applied for optimizing 2 main SVR parameters, which are C, the adjustment value between error handling and generalization, and ε, ε‐tube's radius. The best values were chosen among the ones that achieve the minimum RMSE and the maximum R 2 values for X‐, Y‐, Z‐ and XYZ‐feature vectors, separately.…”
Section: Resultsmentioning
confidence: 99%
See 4 more Smart Citations
“…Support vector regression and PLSR methods were applied to the resulting X‐, Y‐, Z‐, and XYZ‐feature vectors for predicting pIC 50 values of CHK1‐ligand interactions. In contrast with the previous versions of CIFAP examining that the linear regression models fit better to the features obtained from the compressed images of protein‐ligand complexes, the SVR with linear kernel was preferred for the prediction phase rather than the SVR with RBF kernel that was explained by Erdas et al A grid search using leave‐one‐out cross‐validation was applied for optimizing 2 main SVR parameters, which are C, the adjustment value between error handling and generalization, and ε, ε‐tube's radius. The best values were chosen among the ones that achieve the minimum RMSE and the maximum R 2 values for X‐, Y‐, Z‐ and XYZ‐feature vectors, separately.…”
Section: Resultsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Electrostatic properties are crucial parameters for defining interactions between proteins and ligands. In our studies, we attempted to use electrostatic grid maps of protein‐ligand binding sites for predicting the binding affinity of the complexes. Although satisfying RMSE values were obtained as the results of binding affinity prediction, the usage of every electrostatic charge corresponding to a single point on a 3D grid map was expensive for feature selection and prediction operations, which took days to calculate.…”
Section: Resultsmentioning
confidence: 99%
See 3 more Smart Citations