ArticleJournal of cheminformatics2025
Achieving well-informed decision-making in drug discovery: a comprehensive calibration study using neural network-based structure-activity models.
Article in Journal of cheminformatics, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- Advanced machine learning for innovative drug discovery.Journal of cheminformatics · 2025Article
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
In the drug discovery process, where experiments can be costly and time-consuming, computational models that predict drug-target interactions are valuable tools to accelerate the development of new therapeutic agents. Estimating the uncertainty inherent in these neural network predictions provides valuable information that facilitates optimal decision-making when risk assessment is crucial. However, such models can be poorly calibrated, which results in unreliable uncertainty estimates that do not reflect the true predictive uncertainty. In this study, we compare different metrics, including accuracy and calibration scores, used for model hyperparameter tuning to investigate which model selection strategy achieves well-calibrated models. Furthermore, we propose to use a computationally efficient Bayesian uncertainty estimation method named HMC Bayesian Last Layer (HBLL), which generates Hamiltonian Monte Carlo (HMC) trajectories to obtain samples for the parameters of a Bayesian logistic regression fitted to the hidden layer of the baseline neural network. We report that this approach improves model calibration and achieves the performance of common uncertainty quantification methods by combining the benefits of uncertainty estimation and probability calibration methods. Finally, we show that combining post hoc calibration method with well-performing uncertainty quantification approaches can boost model accuracy and calibration.
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.