Evidence map›Paper›PMID 20857153›Full record

ArticleJournal of molecular modeling2011

Brainstorming: weighted voting prediction of inhibitors for protein targets.

Dariusz Plewczynski

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Journal of molecular modeling, 2011. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
6citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

6 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. GIDMP: good protein-protein interaction data metamining practice.Cellular & molecular biology letters · 2011
    Article
  6. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

1 author.

Dariusz PlewczynskiInterdisciplinary Centre for Mathematical and Computational Modelling, University of Warsaw, Pawinskiego 5a Street, 02-106, Warsaw, Poland. D.Plewczynski@icm.edu.pl

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

The "Brainstorming" approach presented in this paper is a weighted voting method that can improve the quality of predictions generated by several machine learning (ML) methods. First, an ensemble of heterogeneous ML algorithms is trained on available experimental data, then all solutions are gathered and a consensus is built between them. The final prediction is performed using a voting procedure, whereby the vote of each method is weighted according to a quality coefficient calculated using multivariable linear regression (MLR). The MLR optimization procedure is very fast, therefore no additional computational cost is introduced by using this jury approach. Here, brainstorming is applied to selecting actives from large collections of compounds relating to five diverse biological targets of medicinal interest, namely HIV-reverse transcriptase, cyclooxygenase-2, dihydrofolate reductase, estrogen receptor, and thrombin. The MDL Drug Data Report (MDDR) database was used for selecting known inhibitors for these protein targets, and experimental data was then used to train a set of machine learning methods. The benchmark dataset (available at http://bio.icm.edu.pl/∼darman/chemoinfo/benchmark.tar.gz ) can be used for further testing of various clustering and machine learning methods when predicting the biological activity of compounds. Depending on the protein target, the overall recall value is raised by at least 20% in comparison to any single machine learning method (including ensemble methods like random forest) and unweighted simple majority voting procedures.

Indexed as

Computer SimulationModels, MolecularAlgorithmsAntithrombinsBayes TheoremCyclooxygenase 2 InhibitorsDecision TreesDrug DiscoveryEstrogen AntagonistsFolic Acid AntagonistsHIV Reverse TranscriptaseHumansLinear ModelsNeural Networks, ComputerPrincipal Component AnalysisProteinsAntithrombinsCyclooxygenase 2 InhibitorsEstrogen AntagonistsFolic Acid AntagonistsHIV Reverse TranscriptaseProteinsSmall Molecule Libraries

Identifiers

PMID20857153
PMCPMC3168748

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.