2014
DOI: 10.1002/prot.24600
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Improving the orientation-dependent statistical potential using a reference state

Abstract: Statistical potentials are frequently engaged in the protein structural prediction and protein folding for conformational evaluation. Theoretically, to describe the many-body effect, pairwise interaction between two atom groups should be corrected by their relative geometric orientation. The potential functions developed by this means are called orientation-dependent statistical potentials and have exhibited substantially improved performance. However, none of the currently available orientation-dependent stat… Show more

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
3
2

Citation Types

0
10
0

Year Published

2016
2016
2021
2021

Publication Types

Select...
6
1
1

Relationship

0
8

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 10 publications
(10 citation statements)
references
References 58 publications
0
10
0
Order By: Relevance
“…There have been multiple approaches developed over last 30 years. These include physics-based techniques [Randall andBaldi, 2008, Faraggi andKloczkowski, 2014], statistical and unsupervised methods, such as DFIRE [Zhou and Zhou, 2002], DOPE [Shen and Sali, 2006], GOAP [Zhou and Skolnick, 2011], RWplus [Zhang and Zhang, 2010], ORDER_AVE [Liu et al, 2014], VoroMQA [Olechnovič and Venclovas, 2014] and more, classical ML-approaches ModelEvaluator [Wang et al, 2009], ProQ2 [Ray et al, 2012], Wang_SVM [Liu et al, 2016], Qprob [Cao and Cheng, 2016], SBROD [Karasikov et al, 2019], a learning-to-rank technique [Jing et al, 2016], deep learning methods [Derevyanko et al, 2018, Conover et al, 2019, Sato and Ishida, 2019, Jing and Xu, 2020, Hiranuma et al, 2020, neural [Wallner and Elofsson, 2003], and graph neural networks [Baldassarre et al, 2020, Sanyal et al, 2020, Igashov et al, 2020.…”
Section: Related Workmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…There have been multiple approaches developed over last 30 years. These include physics-based techniques [Randall andBaldi, 2008, Faraggi andKloczkowski, 2014], statistical and unsupervised methods, such as DFIRE [Zhou and Zhou, 2002], DOPE [Shen and Sali, 2006], GOAP [Zhou and Skolnick, 2011], RWplus [Zhang and Zhang, 2010], ORDER_AVE [Liu et al, 2014], VoroMQA [Olechnovič and Venclovas, 2014] and more, classical ML-approaches ModelEvaluator [Wang et al, 2009], ProQ2 [Ray et al, 2012], Wang_SVM [Liu et al, 2016], Qprob [Cao and Cheng, 2016], SBROD [Karasikov et al, 2019], a learning-to-rank technique [Jing et al, 2016], deep learning methods [Derevyanko et al, 2018, Conover et al, 2019, Sato and Ishida, 2019, Jing and Xu, 2020, Hiranuma et al, 2020, neural [Wallner and Elofsson, 2003], and graph neural networks [Baldassarre et al, 2020, Sanyal et al, 2020, Igashov et al, 2020.…”
Section: Related Workmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…There have been multiple approaches developed over last 30 years. These include physics-based techniques [22,23], statistical and unsupervised methods, such as DFIRE [24], DOPE [25], GOAP [26], RWplus [27], ORDER_AVE [28], VoroMQA [29] and more, classical ML-approaches ModelEvaluator [30], ProQ2 [13], Wang_SVM [31], Qprob [32], SBROD [21], a learning-to-rank technique [33], deep learning methods [15,16,17,34,35], neural [12], and graph neural networks [18,19,20].…”
Section: Related Workmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…In addition to these two main types of QA methods, techniques combining both ideas have also been proposed (11,18), referred to as quasi-single model QA methods. Among recently proposed single-model QA methods, there are generally two main approaches to design a scoring function: physics-based and knowledge-based (data-driven) approaches (7,17). Physics-based scoring functions are constructed according to some physical knowledge of interactions in the system.…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%