ArticleJournal of cheminformatics2021
Assessing the calibration in toxicological in vitro models with conformal prediction.
Article in Journal of cheminformatics, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 8 papers.
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.
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.
Who cites it
8 citing papers in PubMed.
- Explicit Applicability Domain Calculations Can Help Determine When Uncertainty Estimates Are Less Reliable.ACS omega · 2026Article
- Uncertainty Quantification in Molecular Machine Learning for Property Predictions under Data Shifts.Journal of chemical information and modeling · 2026Article
- CPSign: conformal prediction for cheminformatics modeling.Journal of cheminformatics · 2024Article
- Reliable anti-cancer drug sensitivity prediction and prioritization.Scientific reports · 2024Article
- Federated Learning in Computational Toxicology: An Industrial Perspective on the Effiris Hackathon.Chemical research in toxicology · 2023Article
- Studying and mitigating the effects of data drifts on ML model performance at the example of chemical toxicity data.Scientific reports · 2022Article
- Synergy conformal prediction applied to large-scale bioactivity datasets and in federated learning.Journal of cheminformatics · 2021Article
- Machine Learning Strategies When Transitioning between Biological Assays.Journal of chemical information and modeling · 2021Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Machine learning methods are widely used in drug discovery and toxicity prediction. While showing overall good performance in cross-validation studies, their predictive power (often) drops in cases where the query samples have drifted from the training data's descriptor space. Thus, the assumption for applying machine learning algorithms, that training and test data stem from the same distribution, might not always be fulfilled. In this work, conformal prediction is used to assess the calibration of the models. Deviations from the expected error may indicate that training and test data originate from different distributions. Exemplified on the Tox21 datasets, composed of chronologically released Tox21Train, Tox21Test and Tox21Score subsets, we observed that while internally valid models could be trained using cross-validation on Tox21Train, predictions on the external Tox21Score data resulted in higher error rates than expected. To improve the prediction on the external sets, a strategy exchanging the calibration set with more recent data, such as Tox21Test, has successfully been introduced. We conclude that conformal prediction can be used to diagnose data drifts and other issues related to model calibration. The proposed improvement strategy-exchanging the calibration data only-is convenient as it does not require retraining of the underlying model.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.