Cloud computing for fast prediction of chemical activity

Future Generation Computer Systems

Volumn 29, Issue 7, 2013, Pages 1860-1869

  Cała, Jacek ^a   Hiden, Hugo ^a   Woodman, Simon ^a   Watson, Paul ^a  

^a NEWCASTLE UNIVERSITY   (United Kingdom)

Author keywords

Cloud computing; Machine learning; Performance evaluation; Quantitative structure activity relationships; Scalability

Indexed keywords

CLOUD COMPUTING; COMPUTATIONAL CHEMISTRY; LEARNING SYSTEMS; MOLECULAR GRAPHICS; SCALABILITY;

ABSOLUTE PERFORMANCE; BUILDING MODEL; CHEMICAL ACTIVITIES; CLOUD PLATFORMS; DESIGN AND IMPLEMENTATIONS; PERFORMANCE EVALUATION; QUANTITATIVE STRUCTURE ACTIVITY RELATIONSHIP; QUANTITATIVE STRUCTURE-ACTIVITY RELATIONSHIPS;

STRUCTURAL DESIGN;

EID: 84893786296     PISSN: 0167739X     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1016/j.future.2013.01.011     Document Type: Article

References (17)

1. C. Hansch, A. Leo, D.H. Hoekman, Exploring QSAR: Fundamentals and Applications in Chemistry and Biology, American Chemical Society, 1995.
2. J. Cartmell, S. Enoch, D. Krstajic, D.E. Leahy, Automated QSPR through competitive workflow, Journal of Computer-Aided Molecular Design 19 (11) (2005) 821-833.
3. H. Hiden, P. Watson, S. Woodman, D. Leahy, e-Science central: cloud-based e-Science and its application to chemical property modelling, Technical Report: CS-TR-1227, Newcastle University, 2010.
4. P. Watson, et al. Accelerating chemical property prediction with cloud computing, in: Microsoft Research eScience Workshop, Berkeley, CA, US, 2010. Presentation, Available on-line: http://www.esciencecentral.co.uk/docs/2010-10. MSFTe-Science-slides.pdf (accessed: 2.03.12).
5. E.X. Esposito, A.J. Hopfinger, J.D. Madura, Methods for applying the quantitative structure-activity relationship paradigm, Methods in Molecular Biology 275 (2004) 131-214. (Clifton, NJ).
6. D. Weininger, SMILES, a chemical language and information system. 1. Introduction to methodology and encoding rules, Journal of Chemical Information and Computer Sciences 28 (1988) 31-36.
7. P. Watson, H. Hiden, S. Woodman, e-Science central for CARMEN: science as a service, Concurrency and Computation: Practice and Experience 22 (17) (2010) 2369-2380.
8. T. Fox, C. Suconic, Benchmark comparison of messaging throughput in enterprise messaging systems using the java message service API.
9. MSDN library, Improving application availability in Windows Azure. Web Resource: http://msdn.microsoft.com/en-us/library/gg-236576.aspx.
10. I. Raicu, Y. Zhao, C. Dumitrescu, I. Foster, M. Wilde, Falkon: a Fast and Light-weight tasK executiON framework, in: Proceedings of the 2007 ACM/IEEE conference on Supercomputing-SC'07, 2007, pp. 1-12.
11. S. Callaghan, et al., Scaling up workflow-based applications, Journal of Computer and System Sciences 76 (6) (2010) 428-446.
12. A. Tropsha, QSAR modeling and QSAR based virtual screening, complexity and challenges of modern, in: R.A. Meyers (Ed.), Encyclopedia of Complexity and Systems Science, 2009, pp. 7071-7088.
13. C. Luscombe, QSAR workbench: guided QSAR model building for nonexperts, in: The UKQSAR and ChemoInformatics Group, Cambridge, UK, 2011. Presentation, Available on-line: http://www.ukqsar.org/slides/Nov2011-Luscombe.pdf (accessed: 2.03.12).
14. D.J. Wood, D. Buttar, J.G. Cumming, A.M. Davis, U. Norinder, S.L. Rodgers, Automated QSAR with a hierarchy of global and local models, Molecular Informatics (2011) 960-972.
15. D. Wood, A. Davis, S. Rodgers, AutoQSAR automation of the QSAR modelling process, in: Presentation at UK-QSAR-Autumn Meeting 2011. The UKQSAR and ChemoInformatics Group, Cambridge, UK, 2011. Presentation, Available on-line: http://www.ukqsar.org/slides/Nov2011-Wood.pdf (accessed: 2.03.12).
16. E. Deelman, D. Gannon, M. Shields, I. Taylor, Workflows and e-Science: an overview of workflow system features and capabilities, Future Generation Computer Systems 25 (5) (2008) 528-540.
17. I. Raicu, et al., Middleware support for many-task computing, Cluster Computing 13 (3) (2010) 291-314.