ArticleACS omega2022
XLPFE: A Simple and Effective Machine Learning Scoring Function for Protein-Ligand Scoring and Ranking.
Article in ACS omega, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 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
5 citing papers in PubMed.
- Molegro Data Modeller for Machine Learning.Methods in molecular biology (Clifton, N.J.) · 2026Article
- Article
- Advances in ligand-specific biosensing for structurally similar molecules.Cell systems · 2023Review
- Using macromolecular electron densities to improve the enrichment of active compounds in virtual screening.Communications chemistry · 2023Article
- Open-Source Machine Learning in Computational Chemistry.Journal of chemical information and modeling · 2023Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Prediction of protein-ligand binding affinities is a central issue in structure-based computer-aided drug design. In recent years, much effort has been devoted to the prediction of the binding affinity in protein-ligand complexes using machine learning (ML). Due to the remarkable ability of ML methods in nonlinear fitting, ML-based scoring functions (SFs) can deliver much improved performance on a selected test set, such as the comparative assessment of scoring functions (CASF), when compared to the classical SFs. However, the performance of ML-based SFs heavily relies on the overall similarity of the training set and the test set. To improve the performance and transferability of an SF, we have tried to combine various features including energy terms from X-score and AutoDock Vina, the properties of ligands, and the statistical sequence-related information from either the binding site or the full protein. In conjunction with extreme trees (ET), an ML model, we have developed XLPFE, a new SF. Compared with other tested methods such as X-score, AutoDock Vina, ΔvinaXGB, PSH-ML, or CNN-score, XLPFE achieves consistently better scoring and ranking power for various types of protein-ligand complex structures beyond the CASF, suggesting that XLPFE has superior transferability. In particular, XLPFE performs better with metalloenzymes. With its faster speed, improved accuracy, and better transferability, XLPFE could be usefully applied to a diverse range of protein-ligand complexes.
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.