How to winnow actives from inactives: Introducing molecular orthogonal sparse bigrams (MOSBs) and multiclass winnow

Journal of Chemical Information and Modeling

Volumn 48, Issue 2, 2008, Pages 306-318

  Nigsch, Florian ^a   Mitchell, John B O ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY OF CAMBRIDGE   (United Kingdom)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

ALGORITHMS; BIOACTIVITY; DATA STRUCTURES;

MOLECULAR ORTHOGONAL SPARSE BIGRAMS (MOSBS);

FEATURE EXTRACTION;

EID: 41549125090     PISSN: 15499596     EISSN: 1549960X     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1021/ci700350n     Document Type: Article

References (39)

1. Verdonk, M. L.; Berdini, V.; Hartshorn, M. J.; Mooij, W. T. M.; Murray, C. W.; Taylor, R. D.; Watson, P. Virtual screening using protein-ligand docking: avoiding artificial enrichment. J. Chem. Inf. Comput. Sci. 2004, 44, 793-806.
2. Hert, J.; Willett, P.; Wilton, D. J.; Acklin, P.; Azzaoui, K.; Jacoby, E.; Schuffenhauer, A. New methods for ligand-based virtual screening: use of data fusion and machine learning to enhance the effectiveness of similarity searching. J. Chem. Inf. Model. 2006, 46, 462-470.
3. Kubinyi, H. Molecular similarity. I. Chemical structure and biological action. Pharm. Unserer Zeit 1998, 27, 92-106.
4. Kubinyi, H. Molecular similarity. 2. The structural basis of drug design. Pharm. Unserer Zeit 1998, 27, 158-172.
5. Johnson, M.; Lajiness, M.; Maggiora, G. Molecular similarity: a basis for designing drug screening programs. Prog. Clin. Biol. Res. 1989, 291, 167-171.
6. Willett, P. Similarity-based approaches to virtual screening. Biochem. Soc. Trans. 2003, 31, 603-606.
7. Bruce, C. L.; Melville, J. L.; Pickett, S. D.; Hirst, J. D. Contemporary QSAR classifiers compared. J. Chem. Inf. Model. 2007, 47, 219-227.
8. Raevsky, O. A. Physicochemical descriptors in property-based drug design. Mini Rev. Med. Chem. 2004, 4, 1041-1052.
9. Senese, C. L.; Duca, J.; Pan, D.; Hopfinger, A. J.; Tseng, Y. J. 4D-fingerprints, universal QSAR and QSPR descriptors. J. Chem. Inf. Comput. Sci. 2004, 44, 1526-1539.
10. Hert, J.; Willett, P.; Wilton, D. J.; Acklin, P.; Azzaoui, K.; Jacoby, E.; Schuffenhauer, A. Comparison of topological descriptors for similarity-based virtual screening using multiple bioactive reference structures. Org. Biomol. Chem. 2004, 2, 3256-3266.
11. Bender, A.; Glen, R. C. A discussion of measures of enrichment in virtual screening: comparing the information content of descriptors with increasing levels of sophistication. J. Chem. Inf. Model. 2005, 45, 1369-1375.
12. Bender, A.; Mussa, H. Y.; Glen, R. C.; Reiling, S. Molecular similarity searching using atom environments, information-based feature selection, and a naïve Bayesian classifier. J. Chem. Inf. Comput. Sci. 2004, 44, 170-178.
13. Elsevier MDL, 2440 Camino Ramon, Suite 300, San Ramon, CA 94583, U.S.A.
14. Mahé, P.; Ralaivola, L.; Stoven, V.; Vert, J. The pharmacophore kernel for virtual screening with support vector machines. J. Chem. Inf. Model. 2006, 46, 2003-2014.
15. Cannon, E. O.; Bender, A.; Palmer, D. S.; Mitchell, J. B. O. Chemoinformatics-based classification of prohibited substances employed for doping in sport. J. Chem. Inf. Model. 2006, 46, 2369-2380.
16. Molnar, L.; Keseru, G. M. A neural network based virtual screening of cytochrome P450 3A4 inhibitors. Bioorg. Med. Chem. Lett. 2002, 12, 419-421.
17. Cannon, E. O.; Amini, A.; Bender, A.; Sternberg, M. J. E.; Muggleton, S. H.; Glen, R. C.; Mitchell, J. B. O. Support vector inductive logic programming outperforms the naive Bayes classifier and inductive logic programming for the classification of bioactive chemical compounds, J. Comput.-Aided. Mol. Des. 2007, 21, 269-280.
18. Wilton, D. J.; Harrison, R. F.; Willett, P.; Delaney, J.; Lawson, K.; Mullier, G. Virtual screening using binary kernel discrimination: analysis of pesticide data. J. Chem. Inf. Model. 2006, 46, 471-477.
19. Arodz, T.; Yuen, D. A.; Dudek, A. Z. Ensemble of linear models for predicting drug properties. J. Chem. Inf. Model. 2006, 46, 416-423.
20. Littlestone, N. Learning Quickly When Irrelevant Attributes Abound: A New Linear-threshold Algorithm. Machine Learning 1988, 2, 285-318.
21. Breiman, L. Random Forests. Machine Learning 2001, 45, 5-32.
22. Mesterharm, C. A Multi-class Linear Learning Algorithm Related to Winnow. In Adv. Neural Inf. Processing Syst. 2000, 12, 519-525.
23. Siefkes, C.; Assis, F.; Chhabra, S.; Yerazunis, W. S. Combining Winnow and Orthogonal Sparse Bigrams for Incremental Spam Filtering. In Proceedings of the European Conference on Principle and Practice of Knowledge Discovery in Databases; 2004; pp 410-421.
24. Zhang, T. Regularized Winnow Methods. In Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems; 2001; pp 703-709.
25. Zhang, T.; Damerau, F.; Johnson, D. Text Chunking based on a Generalization of Winnow. J. Mach. Learn. Res. 2002, 2, 615-637.
26. Dagan, I.; Karov, Y.; Roth, D. Mistake-driven learning in text-categorization. In Empirical Methods in Natural Language Processing; 1997; pp 55-63.
27. Breiman, L. Bagging Predictors. Machine Learning 1996, 24, 123-140.
28. Glen, R. C.; Bender, A.; Arnby, C. H.; Carlsson, L.; Boyer, S.; Smith, J. Circular fingerprints: flexible molecular descriptors with applications from physical chemistry to ADME. IDrugs 2006, 9, 199-204.
29. Baldi, P.; Brunak, S.; Chauvin, Y.; Andersen, C. A.; Nielsen, H. Assessing the accuracy of prediction algorithms for classification: an overview. Bioinformatics 2000, 16, 412-424.
30. Liaw, A.; Wiener, M. Classification and Regression by randomForest. R News 2002, 2, 18-22.
31. R Development Core Team. R: A Language and Environment for Statistical Computing; R Foundation for Statistical Computing: Vienna, Austria, 2007.
32. Tripos, 1699 South Hanley Road, St. Louis, MO 63144-2319, U.S.A.
33. Guha, R.; Howard, M. T.; Hutchison, G. R.; Murray-Rust, P.; Rzepa, H.; Steinbeck, C.; Wegner, J.; Willighagen, E. L. The Blue Obelisk-interoperability in chemical informatics. J. Chem. Inf. Model. 2006, 46, 991-998.
34. The Open Babel Package, version 2.0.2. http://openbabel. sourceforge.net/ (accessed 02/08/2007).
35. Chemical Computing Group, Suite 910-1010 Sherbrooke St. W Montreal, Quebec, Canada H3A 2R7. http://www.chemComp.com (accessed May 17, 2007).
36. Ehrman, T. M.; Barlow, D. J.; Hylands, P. J. Virtual screening of Chinese herbs with Random Forest. J. Chem. Inf. Model. 2007, 47, 264-278.
37. Zhang, Q.; Aires-de-Sousa, J. Random forest prediction of mutagenicity from empirical physicochemical descriptors. J. Chem. Inf. Model. 2007, 47, 1-8.
38. Agrafiotis, D. K.; Cedeño, W.; Lobanov, V. S. On the use of neural network ensembles in QSAR and QSPR. J. Chem. Inf. Comput. Sci. 2002, 42, 903-911.
39. Bakker, B.; Heskes, T. Clustering ensembles of neural network models. Neural Netw. 2003, 16, 261-269.