The DOI matches its Crossref record; 19 of the 19 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
On Selection of Training and Test Sets for the Development of Predictive QSAR models
Abstract
The development of predictive QSAR models depends not only on the statistical method but also on the algorithm used for the selection of training and test sets. Here, we describe the validation of QSAR models for three data sets with different sizes (n=35, 56 and 87) based on random division, sorted biological activity data and K‐means clusters for the factor scores of the original variable matrix along with/without biological activity values. When the training and test sets were generated by random division or by the activity‐range algorithm, predictive models were not obtained in most of the cases. In case of random division of the data sets into training and test sets, there is no correlation between internal and external validation statistics. However, good external validation statistics were obtained when training and test sets were selected based on K‐means clusters of factor scores of the descriptor space along with/without the biological activity values. So, the selection of training and test sets should be based on the proximity of the representative points of the test set to representative points of the training set in the multidimensional descriptor space. The concept of closeness is based on the general assumption underlying all QSAR theories: similar compounds have similar activities. Thus, if one wishes to validate a QSAR model, the points of the test set must be close to the points of the training set in the multidimensional descriptor space. Based on the results of several methods for the division of the training and test sets, we propose that K‐means‐cluster‐based division of training and prediction sets can be used as a reliable method of division of data set into training and test sets for developing predictive QSAR models.
Overview
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
Citations
Cites
Everitt, B. J., Landau, S., & Leese, M. (1974) · Cited by 9,168
Golbraikh, A., & Tropsha, A. (2002) · Journal of Molecular Graphics and Modelling · doi:10.1016/s1093-3263(01)00123-1 · Cited by 3,735
p-σ-π Analysis. A Method for the Correlation of Biological Activity and Chemical Structure
Hansch, C., & Fujita, T. (1964) · Journal of the American Chemical Society · doi:10.1021/ja01062a035 · Cited by 2,313
Eriksson, L., Jaworska, J., Worth, A. P., Cronin, M. T. D., McDowell, R. M., & Gramatica, P. (2003) · Environmental Health Perspectives · doi:10.1289/ehp.5758 · Cited by 1,325
Darlington, R. B. (1990) · Cited by 986
Ghose, A. K., & Crippen, G. M. (1987) · Journal of Chemical Information and Computer Sciences · doi:10.1021/ci00053a005 · Cited by 803
Assessing Model Fit by Cross-Validation
Hawkins, D. M., Basak, S. C., & Mills, D. (2003) · Journal of Chemical Information and Computer Sciences · doi:10.1021/ci025626i · Cited by 757
Chemometric methods in molecular design
Waterbeemd, H. V. D. (1995) · Medical Entomology and Zoology · Cited by 561
Methods and Principles in Medicinal Chemistry
(2008) · Methods and principles in medicinal chemistry · doi:10.1002/series6138 · Cited by 514
Chemometric methods in molecular design
Martin, Y. C. (1996) · Trends in Pharmacological Sciences · doi:10.1016/s0165-6147(96)90278-3 · Cited by 367
Cited by
How not to develop a quantitative structure–activity or structure–property relationship (QSAR/QSPR)
Dearden, J. C., Cronin, M. T. D., & Kaiser, K. L. E. (2009) · SAR and QSAR in Environmental Research · doi:10.1080/10629360902949567 · Cited by 468
Time-Split Cross-Validation as a Method for Estimating the Goodness of Prospective Prediction.
Sheridan, R. P. (2013) · Journal of Chemical Information and Modeling · doi:10.1021/ci400084k · Cited by 376
Gajewicz, A. (2017) · Nanoscale · doi:10.1039/c7nr02211e · Cited by 71
Metadata
- Authors
- Leonard, J. T., & Roy, K.
- Venue
- QSAR & Combinatorial Science
- Publisher
- Wiley
- Published
- 2006-03
- Volume
- 25
- Issue
- 3
- Pages
- 235-251
- ISSN
- 1611-020X (ISSN-L)
- 1611-0218
- OpenAlex
- W2147084679
- Cited by
- 257
- References
- 19
- FWCI
- 10.67
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review
How to cite
Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.
- This page
- CoChat. (2026). Citation check: On Selection of Training and Test Sets for the Development of Predictive QSAR models. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1002/qsar.200510161
- The paper
- Leonard, J. T., & Roy, K. (2006). On Selection of Training and Test Sets for the Development of Predictive QSAR models. QSAR & Combinatorial Science. https://doi.org/10.1002/qsar.200510161
Data sources
Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.
Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).
Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.