Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
Cited by 264

The DOI matches its Crossref record.

Metric Validation and the Receptor-Relevant Subspace Concept

Pearlman, R. S., Smith, K. M.·1999·Journal of Chemical Information and Computer Sciences

Abstract

Following brief comments regarding the advantages of cell-based diversity algorithms and the selection of low-dimensional chemistry-space metrics needed to implement such algorithms, the notion of metric validation is discussed. Activity-seeded, structure-based clustering is presented as an ideal approach for the validation of either high- or low-dimensional chemistry-space metrics when validation by computer-graphic visualization is not possible. Whereas typical methods for reducing the dimensionality of chemistry-space inevitably discard potentially important information, we present a simple yet novel algorithm for reducing dimensionality by identifying which axes (metrics) convey information related to affinity for a given receptor and which axes can be safely discarded as being irrelevant to the given receptor. This algorithm often reveals a three- or two-dimensional subspace of a (typically six-dimensional) BCUT chemistry-space and, thus, enables computer graphic visualization of the actual coordinates of active compounds and combinatorial libraries. Most significantly, we illustrate the importance of using receptor-relevant distances for identifying near neighbors of lead compounds, comparing libraries, and other diversity-related tasks.

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.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1021/ci980137x

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.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

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

Metadata

Authors
Pearlman, R. S., & Smith, K. M.
Venue
Journal of Chemical Information and Computer Sciences
Published
1999-01-05
Volume
39
Issue
1
Pages
28-35
ISSN
0095-2338 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W2031498906
Cited by
264
References
0
FWCI
21.43
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.