The DOI matches its Crossref record.
Performance of Similarity Measures in 2D Fragment-Based Similarity Searching: Comparison of Structural Descriptors and Similarity Coefficients
Abstract
2D fragment-based similarity searching is one of the most popular techniques for searching a large database of chemical structures and has been widely applied in drug discovery. However, its performance, especially its effectiveness in retrieving active structural analogues, has not been adequately studied. We report a series of computational experiments, where we systematically studied the influence of structural descriptors and similarity coefficients on the effectiveness of similarity searching. The study was conducted using two public large data sets, NCI anti-AIDS and MDDR. Four sets of 2D linear fragment descriptors, based on the original definitions of atom pairs and atom sequences, were compared. The effect of using the Tanimoto coefficient and the Euclidean distance was studied as a function of descriptor set. The results clearly indicate that the Tanimoto coefficient is superior to the Euclidean distance in 2D-fragment based similarity searching, in terms of hit rate, while atom sequences demonstrate the best overall performance among the structural descriptors we studied.
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
Cited by
PubChem Substance and Compound databases
Kim, S., Thiessen, P. A., Bolton, E. E., Chen, J., Fu, G., Gindulyte, A., Han, L., He, J., He, S., Shoemaker, B. A., et al. (2016) · Nucleic Acids Research · doi:10.1093/nar/gkv951 · Cited by 5,436
Relating protein pharmacology by ligand chemistry
Keiser, M. J., Roth, B. L., Armbruster, B. N., Ernsberger, P., Irwin, J. J., & Shoichet, B. K. (2007) · Nature Biotechnology · doi:10.1038/nbt1284 · Cited by 2,402
Similarity-based virtual screening using 2D fingerprints
Willett, P. (2006) · Drug Discovery Today · doi:10.1016/j.drudis.2006.10.005 · Cited by 849
Sastry, M., Lowrie, J. F., Dixon, S. L., & Sherman, W. (2010) · Journal of Chemical Information and Modeling · doi:10.1021/ci100062n · Cited by 332
What Is High-Throughput Virtual Screening? A Perspective from Organic Materials Discovery
Pyzer-Knapp, E. O., Suh, C., Gómez-Bombarelli, R., Aguilera-Iparraguirre, J., & Aspuru-Guzik, A. (2015) · Annual Review of Materials Research · doi:10.1146/annurev-matsci-070214-020823 · Cited by 299
Metadata
- Authors
- Chen, X., & Reynolds, C. H.
- Venue
- Journal of Chemical Information and Computer Sciences
- Publisher
- American Chemical Society (ACS)
- Published
- 2002-10-15
- Volume
- 42
- Issue
- 6
- Pages
- 1407-1414
- ISSN
- 0095-2338 (ISSN-L)
- OpenAlex
- W2019538911
- Cited by
- 191
- References
- 0
- FWCI
- 4.93
- 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: Performance of Similarity Measures in 2D Fragment-Based Similarity Searching: Comparison of Structural Descriptors and Similarity Coefficients. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1021/ci025531g
- The paper
- Chen, X., & Reynolds, C. H. (2002). Performance of Similarity Measures in 2D Fragment-Based Similarity Searching: Comparison of Structural Descriptors and Similarity Coefficients. Journal of Chemical Information and Computer Sciences. https://doi.org/10.1021/ci025531g
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.