The DOI matches its Crossref record; 3 of the 3 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
y-Randomization and Its Variants in QSPR/QSAR
Abstract
y-Randomization is a tool used in validation of QSPR/QSAR models, whereby the performance of the original model in data description (r2) is compared to that of models built for permuted (randomly shuffled) response, based on the original descriptor pool and the original model building procedure. We compared y-randomization and several variants thereof, using original response, permuted response, or random number pseudoresponse and original descriptors or random number pseudodescriptors, in the typical setting of multilinear regression (MLR) with descriptor selection. For each combination of number of observations (compounds), number of descriptors in the final model, and number of descriptors in the pool to select from, computer experiments using the same descriptor selection method result in two different mean highest random r2 values. A lower one is produced by y-randomization or a variant likewise based on the original descriptors, while a higher one is obtained from variants that use random number pseudodescriptors. The difference is due to the intercorrelation of real descriptors in the pool. We propose to compare an original model's r2 to both of these whenever possible. The meaning of the three possible outcomes of such a double test is discussed. Often y-randomization is not available to a potential user of a model, due to the values of all descriptors in the pool for all compounds not being published. In such cases random number experiments as proposed here are still possible. The test was applied to several recently published MLR QSAR equations, and cases of failure were identified. Some progress also is reported toward the aim of obtaining the mean highest r2 of random pseudomodels by calculation rather than by tedious multiple simulations on random number variables.
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
Handbook of Molecular Descriptors
Todeschini, R., & Consonni, V. (2000) · Methods and Principles in Medicinal Chemistry · doi:10.1002/9783527613106 · Cited by 4,107
Golbraikh, A., & Tropsha, A. (2002) · Journal of Molecular Graphics and Modelling · doi:10.1016/s1093-3263(01)00123-1 · Cited by 3,735
Hawkins, D. M. (2004) · Journal of Chemical Information and Computer Sciences · doi:10.1021/ci0342472 · Cited by 2,522
Cited by
Machine Learning for Catalysis Informatics: Recent Applications and Prospects
Toyao, T., Maeno, Z., Takakusagi, S., Kamachi, T., Takigawa, I., & Shimizu, K.-I. (2020) · ACS Catalysis · doi:10.1021/acscatal.9b04186 · Cited by 617
Sendek, A. D., Yang, Q., Cubuk, E. D., Duerloo, K.-A. N., Cui, Y., & Reed, E. J. (2017) · Energy & Environmental Science · doi:10.1039/c6ee02697d · Cited by 448
Energy-based descriptors to rapidly predict hydrogen storage in metal–organic frameworks
Bucior, B. J., Bobbitt, N. S., Islamoglu, T., Goswami, S., Gopalan, A., Yildirim, T., Farha, O. K., Bagheri, N., & Snurr, R. Q. (2019) · Molecular Systems Design & Engineering · doi:10.1039/c8me00050f · Cited by 308
Towards reproducible computational drug discovery
Schaduangrat, N., Lampa, S., Simeon, S., Gleeson, M. P., Spjuth, O., & Nantasenamat, C. (2020) · Journal of Cheminformatics · doi:10.1186/s13321-020-0408-x · Cited by 208
Sedykh, A., Zhu, H., Tang, H., Zhang, L., Richard, A., Rusyn, I., & Tropsha, A. (2011) · Environmental Health Perspectives · doi:10.1289/ehp.1002476 · Cited by 119
Metadata
- Authors
- Rücker, C., Rücker, G., & Meringer, M.
- Venue
- Journal of Chemical Information and Modeling
- Publisher
- American Chemical Society (ACS)
- Published
- 2007-09-20
- Volume
- 47
- Issue
- 6
- Pages
- 2345-2357
- ISSN
- 1549-9596 (ISSN-L)
- 1549-960X
- OpenAlex
- W2087466582
- Cited by
- 969
- References
- 3
- FWCI
- 14.84
- 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.