The DOI matches its Crossref record; 19 of the 19 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
Conformer Generation with OMEGA: Learning from the Data Set and the Analysis of Failures
Abstract
We recently published a high quality validation set for testing conformer generators, consisting of structures from both the PDB and the CSD (Hawkins, P. C. D. et al. J. Chem. Inf. Model. 2010, 50, 572.), and tested the performance of our conformer generator, OMEGA, on these sets. In the present publication, we focus on understanding the suitability of those data sets for validation and identifying and learning from OMEGA's failures. We compare, for the first time we are aware of, the coverage of the applicable property spaces between the validation data sets we used and the parent compound sets to determine if our data sets adequately sample these property spaces. We also introduce the concept of torsion fingerprinting and compare this method of dissimilation to the more traditional graph-centric diversification methods we used in our previous publication. To improve our ability to programmatically identify cases where the crystallographic conformation is not well reproduced computationally, we introduce a new metric to compare conformations, RMSTanimoto. This new metric is used alongside those from our previous publication to efficiently identify reproduction failures. We find RMSTanimoto to be particularly effective in identifying failures for the smallest molecules in our data sets. Analysis of the nature of these failures, particularly those for the CSD, sheds further light on the issue of strain in crystallographic structures. Some of the residual failure cases not resolved by simple changes in OMEGA's defaults present significant challenges to conformer generation engines like OMEGA and are a source of new avenues to further improve their performance, while others illustrate the pitfalls of validating against crystallographic ligand conformations, particularly those from the PDB.
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
Berman, H. M. (2000) · Nucleic Acids Research · doi:10.1093/nar/28.1.235 · Cited by 40,196
Merck molecular force field. I. Basis, form, scope, parameterization, and performance of MMFF94
Halgren, T. A. (1996) · Journal of Computational Chemistry · doi:10.1002/(sici)1096-987x(199604)17:5/6<490::aid-jcc1>3.0.co;2-p · Cited by 5,306
Hawkins, P. C. D., Skillman, A. G., Warren, G. L., Ellingson, B. A., & Stahl, M. T. (2010) · Journal of Chemical Information and Modeling · doi:10.1021/ci100031x · Cited by 1,607
Self-citationGenerating Conformer Ensembles Using a Multiobjective Genetic Algorithm
Vainio, M. J., & Johnson, M. S. (2007) · Journal of Chemical Information and Modeling · doi:10.1021/ci6005646 · Cited by 418
Brameld, K. A., Kuhn, B., Reuter, D. C., & Stahl, M. (2008) · Journal of Chemical Information and Modeling · doi:10.1021/ci7002494 · Cited by 372
Comparing protein–ligand docking programs is difficult
Cole, J. C., Murray, C. W., Nissink, J. W. M., Taylor, R. D., & Taylor, R. (2005) · Proteins: Structure, Function, and Bioinformatics · doi:10.1002/prot.20497 · Cited by 371
Chen, I.-J., & Foloppe, N. (2010) · Journal of Chemical Information and Modeling · doi:10.1021/ci100026x · Cited by 204
Clustering of Large Databases of Compounds: Using the MDL “Keys” as Structural Descriptors
McGregor, M. J., & Pallai, P. V. (1997) · Journal of Chemical Information and Computer Sciences · doi:10.1021/ci960151e · Cited by 181
Boström, J. (2001) · Journal of Computer-Aided Molecular Design · doi:10.1023/a:1015930826903 · Cited by 178
Essential considerations for using protein–ligand structures in drug discovery
Warren, G. L., Do, T. D., Kelley, B. P., Nicholls, A., & Warren, S. D. (2012) · Drug Discovery Today · doi:10.1016/j.drudis.2012.06.011 · Cited by 161
Self-citationKirchmair, J., Laggner, C., Wolber, G., & Langer, T. (2005) · Journal of Chemical Information and Modeling · doi:10.1021/ci049753l · Cited by 134
Flexibases: A way to enhance the use of molecular docking methods
Kearsley, S. K., Underwood, D. J., Sheridan, R. P., & Miller, M. D. (1994) · Journal of Computer-Aided Molecular Design · doi:10.1007/bf00123666 · Cited by 117
Chen, I., & Foloppe, N. (2008) · Journal of Chemical Information and Modeling · doi:10.1021/ci800130k · Cited by 109
Conformational Sampling of Bioactive Molecules: A Comparative Study
Agrafiotis, D. K., Gibbs, A. C., Zhu, F., Izrailev, S., & Martin, É. (2007) · Journal of Chemical Information and Modeling · doi:10.1021/ci6005454 · Cited by 108
Frog: a FRee Online druG 3D conformation generator
Leite, T. B., Gomes, D. E. B., Miteva, M. A., Chomilier, J., Villoutreix, B. O., & Tufféry, P. (2007) · Nucleic Acids Research · doi:10.1093/nar/gkm289 · Cited by 106
Rearrangement of Cruickshank's formulae for the diffraction-component precision index
Blow, D. M. (2002) · Acta Crystallographica Section D Biological Crystallography · doi:10.1107/s0907444902003931 · Cited by 72
PDB Ligand Conformational Energies Calculated Quantum-Mechanically
Sitzmann, M., Weidlich, I. E., Filippov, I. V., Liao, C., Peach, M. L., Ihlenfeldt, W., Karki, R. G., Borodina, Y. V., Cachau, R. E., & Nicklaus, M. C. (2012) · Journal of Chemical Information and Modeling · doi:10.1021/ci200595n · Cited by 62
GARD: A Generally Applicable Replacement for RMSD
Baber, J. C., Thompson, D. C., Cross, J. B., & Humblet, C. C. (2009) · Journal of Chemical Information and Modeling · doi:10.1021/ci9001074 · Cited by 59
Automated conformational analysis: Directed conformational search using the A* algorithm
Leach, A. R., & Prout, K. (1990) · Journal of Computational Chemistry · doi:10.1002/jcc.540111012 · Cited by 58
Cited by
Engineering an allosteric transcription factor to respond to new ligands
Taylor, N. D., Garruss, A. S., Moretti, R., Chan, S., Arbing, M. A., Cascio, D., Rogers, J. K., Isaacs, F. J., Kosuri, S., Baker, D., et al. (2016) · Nature Methods · doi:10.1038/nmeth.3696 · Cited by 328
Grinter, S., & Zou, X. (2014) · Molecules · doi:10.3390/molecules190710150 · Cited by 260
Wang, S., Witek, J., Landrum, G. A., & Riniker, S. (2020) · Journal of Chemical Information and Modeling · doi:10.1021/acs.jcim.0c00025 · Cited by 253
Rationalizing PROTAC-Mediated Ternary Complex Formation Using Rosetta
Bai, N., Miller, S. A., Andrianov, G. V., Yates, M., Kirubakaran, P., & Karanicolas, J. (2021) · Journal of Chemical Information and Modeling · doi:10.1021/acs.jcim.0c01451 · Cited by 157
Automated Building of Organometallic Complexes from 3D Fragments
Foscato, M., Venkatraman, V., Occhipinti, G., Alsberg, B. K., & Jensen, V. R. (2014) · Journal of Chemical Information and Modeling · doi:10.1021/ci5003153 · Cited by 35
Metadata
- Authors
- Hawkins, P. C. D., & Nicholls, A.
- Venue
- Journal of Chemical Information and Modeling
- Publisher
- American Chemical Society (ACS)
- Published
- 2012-11-12
- Volume
- 52
- Issue
- 11
- Pages
- 2919-2936
- ISSN
- 1549-9596 (ISSN-L)
- 1549-960X
- OpenAlex
- W2090431249
- Cited by
- 403
- References
- 19
- FWCI
- 42.42
- 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
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.
