ArticleScientific reports2024
Ensembling methods for protein-ligand binding affinity prediction.
Article in Scientific reports, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 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
3 citing papers in PubMed.
- 3D Geometric Equivariant Graph Neural Networks with Contrastive Learning for Protein-Ligand Binding Affinity Prediction.Interdisciplinary sciences, computational life sciences · 2026Article
- The Human Omnibus of Targetable Pockets.Journal of cheminformatics · 2025Article
- AI meets physics in computational structure-based drug discovery for GPCRs.npj drug discovery · 2025Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Protein-ligand binding affinity prediction is a key element of computer-aided drug discovery. Most of the existing deep learning methods for protein-ligand binding affinity prediction utilize single models and suffer from low accuracy and generalization capability. In this paper, we train 13 deep learning models from combinations of 5 input features. Then, we explore all possible ensembles of the trained models to find the best ensembles. Our deep learning models use cross-attention and self-attention layers to extract short and long-range interactions. Our method is named Ensemble Binding Affinity (EBA). EBA extracts information from various models using different combinations of input features, such as simple 1D sequential and structural features of the protein-ligand complexes rather than 3D complex features. EBA is implemented to accurately predict the binding affinity of a protein-ligand complex. One of our ensembles achieves the highest Pearson correlation coefficient (R) value of 0.914 and the lowest root mean square error (RMSE) value of 0.957 on the well-known benchmark test set CASF2016. Our ensembles show significant improvements of more than 15% in R-value and 19% in RMSE on both well-known benchmark CSAR-HiQ test sets over the second-best predictor named CAPLA. Furthermore, the superior performance of the ensembles across all metrics compared to existing state-of-the-art protein-ligand binding affinity prediction methods on all five benchmark test datasets demonstrates the effectiveness and robustness of our approach. Therefore, our approach to improving binding affinity prediction between proteins and ligands can contribute to improving the success rate of potential drugs and accelerate the drug development process.
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.