Evidence map›Paper›PMID 38987462›Full record

ArticleMethods in molecular biology (Clifton, N.J.)2024

Free-Docking and Template-Based Docking: Physics Versus Knowledge-Based Docking.

Magdalena A Krupa, Paweł Krupa

Abstract read
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in Methods in molecular biology (Clifton, N.J.), 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
2citing 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

2 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. 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

2 authors.

Magdalena A KrupaInstitute of Computer Science, Polish Academy of Sciences, Warsaw, Poland.
Paweł KrupaInstitute of Physics, Polish Academy of Sciences, Warsaw, Poland. pkrupa@ifpan.edu.pl.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Docking methods can be used to predict the orientations of two or more molecules with respect of each other using a plethora of various algorithms, which can be based on the physics of interactions or can use information from databases and templates. The usability of these approaches depends on the type and size of the molecules, whose relative orientation will be estimated. The two most important limitations are (i) the computational cost of the prediction and (ii) the availability of the structural information for similar complexes. In general, if there is enough information about similar systems, knowledge-based and template-based methods can significantly reduce the computational cost while providing high accuracy of the prediction. However, if the information about the system topology and interactions between its partners is scarce, physics-based methods are more reliable or even the only choice. In this chapter, knowledge-, template-, and physics-based methods will be compared and briefly discussed providing examples of their usability with a special emphasis on physics-based protein-protein, protein-peptide, and protein-fullerene docking in the UNRES coarse-grained model.

Indexed as

AlgorithmsMolecular Docking SimulationProteinsComputational BiologyKnowledge BasesProtein BindingProtein ConformationSoftwareProteinsCarbon nanoparticlesForce fieldsFullerenesGenetic algorithmsKnowledge-based docking methodsMolecular dynamicsPhysics-based docking methodsProteins and peptidesTemplate-based docking methodsUNRES

Identifiers

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
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.