The DOI matches its Crossref record.
Scoring functions for protein-ligand docking.
Abstract
Virtual screening by molecular docking has become established as a method for drug lead discovery and optimization. All docking algorithms make use of a scoring function in combination with a method of search. Two theoretical aspects of scoring function performance dominate operational performance. The first is the degree to which a scoring function has a global extremum within the ligand pose landscape at the proper location. The second is the degree to which the magnitude of the function at the extremum is accurate. Presuming adequate search strategies, a scoring function's location performance will dominate behavior with respect to docking accuracy: the degree to which a predicted pose of a ligand matches experimental observation. A scoring function's magnitude performance will dominate behavior with respect to screening utility: enrichment of true ligands over non-ligands. Magnitude estimation also controls pure scoring accuracy: the degree to which bona fide ligands of a particular protein may be correctly ranked. Approaches to the development of scoring functions have varied widely, with a number of functions yielding similarly high levels of performance relating to the location issue. However, even among functions performing equally well on location, widely varying performance is observed on the question of magnitude. In many cases, performance is good enough to yield high enrichments of true ligands versus non-ligands in screening across a wide variety of protein types. Generally, performance is not good enough to correctly rank among true ligands. Strategies for improvement are discussed.
Overview
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
Claims other papers make about this one
Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?
In the citing paper
“Given the difficulty in modeling entropic effects for ΔGbind, scoring functions generally neglect their contributions or adopt simplified algorithms to approximate entropies in a straightforward manner (Jain, 2006).”
From Empirical scoring functions for structure-based virtual screening: applications, critical aspects, and challenges (2018) · cites this paper as Jain, 2006
Citations
Cited by
Sorted by citations
Items 201–259 of 259
Development of Nucleic Acid Targeting Molecules: Molecular Docking Approaches and Recent Advances
Umare, M. D., Alkathiri, F. A., & Chikhale, R. V. (2022) · Biomedical engineering · doi:10.5772/intechopen.107349 · Cited by 4
Advancements in Cancer Therapeutics
Kecel‐Gunduz, S., Bıçak, B., & Özel, A. E. (2020) · Advances in medical diagnosis, treatment, and care (AMDTC) book series · doi:10.4018/978-1-7998-6530-8.ch003 · Cited by 3
Computational Approaches in Peptide and Protein Design: An Overview
Nikiforovich, G. V., & Marshall, G. R. (2009) · Wiley eBooks · doi:10.1002/9780470749708.ch2 · Cited by 5
Synthesis, Computational and Nanoencapsulation Studies on Eugenol-Derived InsecticidesPreprint
Coelho, C. M. M., Pereira, R. B., Vieira, T. F., et al. (2022) · Preprints.org · doi:10.20944/preprints202203.0354.v1 · Cited by 3
MATHEW, A., Das, S., JOSEPH, L. A., Birangal, S., & Mathew, J. (2024) · International Journal of Applied Pharmaceutics · doi:10.22159/ijap.2024v16i5.51514 · Cited by 2
“The top 100 compounds from SP are then subjected to Extra Precision (XP), which utilizes a more complex but more accurate and thorough scoring function that sorts the ligands semi-quantitatively based on their binding to the receptor [25].”
BackgroundAl-Momani, L. A., Shawar, U. A. A., Sarhan, A. H. A., et al. (2025) · Chemistry · doi:10.3390/chemistry7030071 · Cited by 2
“This protocol identifies various interaction types, including favorable, unfavorable This protocol identifies various interaction types, including favorable, unfavorable, charge, halogen, hydrophobic, and hydrogen bond interactions. charge, halogen, hydrophobic, and hydrogen bond interactions.”
InfluentialAli, M. A., Alqahtani, T., Sindi, E. R., et al. (2026) · Journal of Molecular Graphics and Modelling · doi:10.1016/j.jmgm.2026.109324 · Cited by 2
In silico development of quorum sensing inhibitors
Magalhães, R. P., Vieira, T. F., Melo, A., & Sousa, S. F. (2020) · Elsevier eBooks · doi:10.1016/b978-0-12-819497-3.00015-5 · Cited by 2
Nagarajan, S. K., Babu, S., Devaraju, P., Sohn, H., & Madhavan, T. (2021) · Proteins Structure Function and Bioinformatics · doi:10.1002/prot.26267 · Cited by 2
Radio-protective efficacy of Gymnema sylvestre on Pangasius sutchi against gamma (60Co) irradiation
Sinha, P., Arunachalam, K. D., Nagarajan, S. K., Madhavan, T., Jayakumar, A. R., & Musthafa, M. S. (2021) · International Journal of Radiation Biology · doi:10.1080/09553002.2022.1998701 · Cited by 2
Recent Advances in Computational Modeling of Multi-targeting Inhibitors as Anti-Alzheimer Agents
Thai, K., Tran, T., Tran, T., Cao, T., Ho, H. N., Huynh, P., Mai, T. T., Tran, T., Le, M.-T., & Tran, V.-T. (2023) · Neuromethods · doi:10.1007/978-1-0716-3311-3_8 · Cited by 2
Ensemble-based virtual screening of African natural products to target human thymidylate synthase
Mteremko, D., Chilongola, J. O., Paluch, A. S., & Chacha, M. N. (2023) · Journal of Molecular Graphics and Modelling · doi:10.1016/j.jmgm.2023.108568 · Cited by 2
Genetic clustering with Bee Colony Optimization for flexible protein-ligand docking
Nesamalar, E. K., & Chandran, C. P. (2012) · doi:10.1109/icprime.2012.6208291 · Cited by 2
“The goal is to minimize this binding energy to find the best conformation.”
BackgroundPrabu, S. L. (2018) · Advances in medical technologies and clinical practice book series · doi:10.4018/978-1-5225-7326-5.ch001 · Cited by 2
Molecular Modeling and Drug Design Techniques in Microbial Drug Discovery
Selvaraj, C. (2019) · Springer eBooks · doi:10.1007/978-3-030-18375-2_11 · Cited by 2
Spiegel, J. D., & Senderowitz, H. (2022) · Molecular Informatics · doi:10.1002/minf.202200034 · Cited by 2
Inhibitor screening for volume-sensitive LRRC8A chloride channel
Liu, C., Cui, W., Zhu, K., et al. (2023) · Journal of Biomolecular Structure and Dynamics · doi:10.1080/07391102.2023.2274521 · Cited by 1
Mumtaz, M., Khan, K., Khan, A., et al. (2025) · Scientific Reports · doi:10.1038/s41598-025-14583-y · Cited by 1
Virtual Ligand Screening for Structure-based Drug Design: Approaches and Progress
Spérandio, O., Miteva, M. A., & Villoutreix, B. O. (2007) · DOAJ (DOAJ: Directory of Open Access Journals) · Cited by 1
Current Trends in Docking Methodologies
Tripathi, S., Kumar, A., Kahlon, A. K., & Sharma, A. K. (2016) · Advances in medical technologies and clinical practice book series · doi:10.4018/978-1-5225-0115-2.ch013 · Cited by 1
Integrated in Silico Methods for the Design and Optimization of Novel Drug Candidates
Minovski, N., & Novič, M. (2015) · Advances in chemical and materials engineering book series · doi:10.4018/978-1-4666-8136-1.ch008 · Cited by 1
Insecticide discovery by drug repurposing: new synergistic inhibitors against Periplaneta americana
Chafer-Dolz, B., Cecilia, J. M., Imbernón, B., et al. (2023) · New Journal of Chemistry · doi:10.1039/d3nj02676k · Cited by 1
Computational Toxicology Studies of Chemical Compounds Released from Firecrackers
Lawrence, A. J., Tiwari, N., & Khan, T. (2023) · BENTHAM SCIENCE PUBLISHERS eBooks · doi:10.2174/9789815196986123010011 · Cited by 1
Gulati, I., Tripathi, S., & Tiwari, S. S. (2024) · Springer eBooks · doi:10.1007/978-981-97-1912-9_15 · Cited by 1
Maximizing resource usage in multifold molecular dynamics with rCUDA
Prades, J., Imbernón, B., Reaño, C., Peña-García, J. J., Cerón‐Carrasco, J. P., Silla, F., & Pérez‐Sánchez, H. (2019) · The International Journal of High Performance Computing Applications · doi:10.1177/1094342019857131 · Cited by 1
Bhavesh, A. B., Amrutkar, R. D., & Tambe Santosh, R. (2019) · Current Computer - Aided Drug Design · doi:10.2174/1573409915666190916100437 · Cited by 1
Current Trends in Docking Methodologies
Tripathi, S., Kumar, A., Kahlon, A. K., & Sharma, A. K. (2016) · IGI Global eBooks · doi:10.4018/978-1-5225-0549-5.ch032 · Cited by 1
Amrutkar, R. D., & Ranawat, M. S. (2023) · International Journal of Pharmaceutical Sciences and Drug Research · doi:10.25004/ijpsdr.2023.150516 · Cited by 1
Aryanti, I. F. K., & Susilo, J. (2022) · Indonesian Journal of Pharmacy and Natural Product · doi:10.35473/ijpnp.v5i2.1789 · Cited by 3
Target‐Based Virtual Screening to Address Protein–Protein Interfaces
Spérandio, O., Miteva, M. A., & Villoutreix, B. O. (2011) · Methods and principles in medicinal chemistry · doi:10.1002/9783527633326.ch16 · Cited by 1
Li, Y., Zhou, D., Zheng, G., et al. (2021) · bioRxiv (Cold Spring Harbor Laboratory) · doi:10.1101/2021.10.26.465921 · Cited by 1
Firouzi, R., Sowlati‐Hashjin, S., Chávez-García, C., Ashouri, M., Karimi‐Jafari, M. H., & Karttunen, M. (2022) · bioRxiv (Cold Spring Harbor Laboratory) · doi:10.1101/2022.02.09.479729 · Cited by 1
Lindström, A. (2008) · KTH Publication Database DiVA (KTH Royal Institute of Technology)
Molecular Docking Study of Novel Anti-Hepatitis B Virus Agents Isolated from Talaromyces Species
Babu, S. (2016) · Journal of the Chosun Natural Science · doi:10.13160/ricns.2016.9.1.23
“active site called protomol([24]) which is the representation of intended binding site to which the ligand molecules were docked.”
BackgroundDocking Study of Human Galactokinase Inhibitors
Babu, S. (2015) · Journal of the Chosun Natural Science · doi:10.13160/ricns.2015.8.4.267
“The docking algorithm in surflex dock uses an idealized active site called protomol([10]).”
MethodA molecular dynamics study of ligand binding in mutant avidins
Kukkurainen, S. (2009) · Tampere University Institutional Repository (Tampere University)
Docking Study of Cysteinyl Leukotriene 1 Receptor: Therapeutic Target for Allergy
Babu, S. (2016) · Journal of the Chosun Natural Science · doi:10.13160/ricns.2016.9.4.228
Federico, L. B. (2017) · Digital Library of Theses and Dissertations (Universidade de São Paulo) · doi:10.11606/t.59.2017.tde-03022017-141932
Vieira, T. F., Magalhães, R. P., Cerqueira, N. M. F. S. A., et al. (2019) · IEEE Portuguese Meeting on Bioengineering · doi:10.1109/enbeng.2019.8692567
“The success of protein-ligand docking is a result of the interplay between two different algorithms: the search algorithm and the scoring function.[6, 14, 15] The search algorithm is responsible for the exploration of different ligand conformations and orientations (the pose) within a particular target protein or rece…”
BackgroundModelling for regenerative medicine: systems biology meets systems chemistry
Winkler, D. A., Halley, J. D., & Burden, F. R. (2009)
Integrated in Silico Methods for the Design and Optimization of Novel Drug Candidates
Minovski, N., & Novič, M. (2016) · IGI Global eBooks · doi:10.4018/978-1-5225-0549-5.ch016
Virtual Screening of Kinase Based Drugs: Statistical Learning Towards Drug Repositioning
Mustapha, M. T., Flower, D. R., & Chattopadhyay, A. K. (2022) · Journal of Nanotechnology in Diagnosis and Treatment · doi:10.12974/2311-8792.2022.08.03
“SF methods identify vectors comprising their energies, locations and bond lengths (separation of each ligand atom to the atoms of protein residues) to define numerical descriptors that can decode the best possible structural match between a kinase and its ligand inhibitor [35, 36].”
MethodIn Silico Approaches in Pesticides
Barcelos, M. P., & da Silva, C. H. T. D. P. (2023) · Engineering materials · doi:10.1007/978-3-031-46545-1_17
Anticancer Activity of Medicinal Plants Extract and Molecular Docking Studies
Çetinkaya, S., & Tüzün, B. (2023) · BENTHAM SCIENCE PUBLISHERS eBooks · doi:10.2174/9789815179934123010007
Bouchentouf, S., Arbi, B., Kowalska, G., & Kowalski, R. (2024) · Current Issues in Pharmacy and Medical Sciences · doi:10.2478/cipms-2024-0039
In Silico, In Vitro Approach Against Synthesised Bromotriazepineone Derivatives
Meenakumari, M., Girija, R., & Preethi, B. (2024) · Springer proceedings in physics · doi:10.1007/978-3-031-69970-2_23
Banupriya, K., & Preethi, B. (2024) · Springer proceedings in physics · doi:10.1007/978-3-031-69970-2_22
Differential Evolution for Docking Simulations
da Silva, A. D., Russo, S., Vergara, E. G., & de Azevedo, W. F. (2025) · Methods in molecular biology · doi:10.1007/978-1-0716-4949-7_14
Wang, Y., Wei, Z., & Xi, L. (2022) · Figshare · doi:10.6084/m9.figshare.20035644
Niekerk, S. E. V., Cloete, T. T., van der Kooy, F., & Hamman, J. H. (2026) · Journal of Cannabis Research · doi:10.1186/s42238-025-00363-y
“…and the results were rescored using the LigScore 1 & 2 (Krammer et al. 2005), Piece-wise Linear Potential (PLP) 1 & 2 (Verkhivker et al. 2000, Jain 2006), Potential of Mean Force (PMF) (Muegge 2006) and PMF 4 scoring functions, in addition to the native scoring function of each docking…”
Computational Pipelines for Disease-Specific Drug Repurposing
Abdelsayed, M. (2026) · Pharmaceutical science. · doi:10.5772/intechopen.1015541
Computational Approaches to Drug–Receptor Binding Analysis
Pandey, R., Nautiyal, U., Chandola, A., et al. (2026) · doi:10.1002/9781394371112.ch05
Ahmed, M. H. (2011) · VCU Scholars Compass (Virginia Commonwealth University) · doi:10.25772/5zmh-eg93
Theoretical and experimental studies of thermolysin inhibition
Wuxiuer, Y. (2008) · NORA - Norwegian Open Research Archives
A Docking Study of Newly Found Natural Neuraminidase Inhibitor: Erystagallin A
Madhavan, T. (2011) · Journal of the Chosun Natural Science · doi:10.13160/ricns.2011.4.4.273
“The docking algorithm uses the idealized active site called a protomol([9]).”
Method
Metadata
- Authors
- Bentham Science Publisher, B. S. P.
- Venue
- Current Protein & Peptide Science
- Publisher
- Bentham Science Publishers Ltd.
- Published
- 2006-10-01
- Volume
- 7
- Issue
- 5
- Pages
- 407-420
- ISSN
- 1389-2037 (ISSN-L)
- OpenAlex
- W1512801428
- Cited by
- 258
- References
- 0
- Citations by year
- 2026: 4 · 2025: 8 · 2024: 11 · 2023: 21 · 2022: 32 · 2021: 16 · 2020: 15 · 2019: 16 · 2018: 12 · 2017: 12 · 2016: 14 · 2015: 8 · 2014: 6 · 2013: 6 · 2012: 13
- FWCI
- 12.94
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
- Locations
- Current Protein and Peptide Science (publishedVersion)
- PubMed (publishedVersion)
- Funders
- National Institutes of Health
- National Institute of General Medical Sciences (GM070781, R01GM070481)
- Topics
- Life Sciences › Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutics › Drug Discovery › Computational Drug Discovery Methods
- Life Sciences › Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology › Molecular Biology › Protein Structure and Dynamics
- Life Sciences › Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology › Molecular Biology › vaccines and immunoinformatics approaches
- Keywords
- protein-ligand docking, scoring functions, virtual screening, docking accuracy, enrichment, ligand ranking, lead compound identification
- MeSH terms
- Animals, Drug Evaluation, Preclinical, Ligands, Models, Chemical, Protein Binding, Proteins, Research Design
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