Erratum to: VAMPnets for deep learning of molecular kinetics (Nature Communications, (2018), 9, 1, (5), 10.1038/s41467-017-02388-1);VAMPnets for deep learning of molecular kinetics

Nature Communications

Volumn 9, Issue 1, 2018, Pages

  Mardt, Andreas ^a   Pasquali, Luca ^a   Wu, Hao ^a   Noé, Frank ^a  

^a FREIE UNIVERSITÄT BERLIN   (Germany)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

CHEMICAL BINDING; DATA PROCESSING; ERROR ANALYSIS; LEARNING; MARKOV CHAIN; MOLECULAR ANALYSIS; NEUROLOGY; REACTION KINETICS;

ANALYTICAL ERROR; ARTICLE; ARTIFICIAL NEURAL NETWORK; CHEMICAL STRUCTURE; CONCEPTUAL FRAMEWORK; DATA PROCESSING; KINETICS; MACHINE LEARNING; MARKOV CHAIN; MOLECULAR DYNAMICS; MOLECULAR MODEL; VARIATIONAL APPROACH FOR MARKOV PROCESS; ALGORITHM; PROTEIN FOLDING;

PROTEIN BINDING;

ALGORITHMS; KINETICS; MACHINE LEARNING; MARKOV CHAINS; MOLECULAR DYNAMICS SIMULATION; NEURAL NETWORKS (COMPUTER); PROTEIN BINDING; PROTEIN FOLDING;

EID: 85039927762     PISSN: None     EISSN: 20411723     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1038/s41467-018-06999-0     Document Type: Erratum

References (84)

1. Lindorff-Larsen, K., Piana, S., Dror, R. O. & Shaw, D. E. How fast-folding proteins fold. Science 334, 517-520 (2011).
2. Plattner, N., Doerr, S., Fabritiis, G. D. & Noé, F. Complete protein-protein association kinetics in atomic detail revealed by molecular dynamics simulations and Markov modelling. Nat. Chem. 9, 1005-1011 (2017).
3. Kohlhoff, K. J. et al. Cloud-based simulations on google exacycle reveal ligand modulation of gpcr activation pathways. Nat. Chem. 6, 15-21 (2014).
4. Doerr, S., Harvey, M. J., Noé, F. & De Fabritiis, G. HTMD: high-throughput molecular dynamics for molecular discovery. J. Chem. Theory Comput. 12, 1845-1852 (2016).
5. Ufimtsev, I. S. & Martinez, T. J. Graphical processing units for quantum chemistry. Comp. Sci. Eng. 10, 26-34 (2008).
6. Marx, D. & Hutter, J. in Modern Methods and Algorithms of Quantum Chemistry of NIC Series Vol. 1, 301-449 Ab initio molecular dynamics: theory and implementation (ed Grotendorst, J.) (John von Neumann Institute for Computing, Jülich, 2000).
7. Schütte, C., Fischer, A., Huisinga, W. & Deuflhard, P. A direct approach to conformational dynamics based on hybrid monte carlo. J. Comput. Phys. 151, 146-168 (1999).
8. Prinz, J.-H. et al. Markov models of molecular kinetics: generation and validation. J. Chem. Phys. 134, 174105 (2011).
9. Swope, W. C., Pitera, J. W. & Suits, F. Describing protein folding kinetics by molecular dynamics simulations: 1. Theory J. Phys. Chem. B 108, 6571-6581 (2004).
10. Noé, F., Horenko, I., Schütte, C. & Smith, J. C. Hierarchical analysis of conformational dynamics in biomolecules: transition networks of metastable states. J. Chem. Phys. 126, 155102 (2007).
11. Chodera, J. D. et al. Automatic discovery of metastable states for the construction of Markov models of macromolecular conformational dynamics. J. Chem. Phys. 126, 155101 (2007).
12. Buchete, N. V. & Hummer, G. Coarse master equations for peptide folding dynamics. J. Phys. Chem. B 112, 6057-6069 (2008).
13. Scherer, M. K. et al. PyEMMA 2: a software package for estimation, validation and analysis of Markov models. J. Chem. Theory Comput. 11, 5525-5542 (2015).
14. Harrigan, M. P. et al. Msmbuilder: statistical models for biomolecular dynamics. Biophys. J. 112, 10-15 (2017).
15. Humphrey, W., Dalke, A. & Schulten, K. Vmd - visual molecular dynamics. J. Mol. Graph. 14, 33-38 (1996).
16. McGibbon, R. T. et al. Mdtraj: a modern open library for the analysis of molecular dynamics trajectories. Biophys. J. 109, 1528-1532 (2015).
17. Noé, F. & Nüske, F. A variational approach to modeling slow processes in stochastic dynamical systems. Multiscale Model. Simul. 11, 635-655 (2013).
18. Nüske, F., Keller, B. G., Pérez-Hernández, G., Mey, A. S. J. S. & Noé, F. Variational approach to molecular kinetics. J. Chem. Theory Comput. 10, 1739-1752 (2014).
19. Perez-Hernandez, G., Paul, F., Giorgino, T., D Fabritiis, G. & Noé, F. Identification of slow molecular order parameters for Markov model construction. J. Chem. Phys. 139, 015102 (2013).
20. Schwantes, C. R. & Pande, V. S. Improvements in Markov state model construction reveal many non-native interactions in the folding of ntl9. J. Chem. Theory Comput. 9, 2000-2009 (2013).
21. Molgedey, L. & Schuster, H. G. Separation of a mixture of independent signals using time delayed correlations. Phys. Rev. Lett. 72, 3634-3637 (1994).
22. Ziehe, A. & Müller, K.-R. in ICANN Vol. 98, 675-680 TDSEP - an efficient algorithm for blind separation using time structure (Springer, London, 1998).
23. Harmeling, S., Ziehe, A., Kawanabe, M. & Müller, K.-R. Kernel-based nonlinear blind source separation. Neural Comput. 15, 1089-1124 (2003).
24. Mezić, I. Spectral properties of dynamical systems, model reduction and decompositions. Nonlinear Dynam. 41, 309-325 (2005).
25. Schmid, P. J. & Sesterhenn, J. Dynamic mode decomposition of numerical and experimental data. In 61st Annual Meeting of the APS Division of Fluid Dynamics (American Physical Society, 2008).
26. Tu, J. H., Rowley, C. W., Luchtenburg, D. M., Brunton, S. L. & Kutz, J. N. On dynamic mode decomposition: theory and applications. J. Comput. Dyn. 1, 391-421 (2014).
27. Williams, M. O., Kevrekidis, I. G. & Rowley, C. W. A data-driven approximation of the koopman operator: extending dynamic mode decomposition. J. Nonlinear Sci. 25, 1307-1346 (2015).
28. Wu, H. et al. Variational koopman models: slow collective variables and molecular kinetics from short off-equilibrium simulations. J. Chem. Phys. 146, 154104 (2017).
29. Noé, F. & Clementi, C. Collective variables for the study of long-time kinetics from molecular trajectories: theory and methods. Curr. Opin. Struc. Biol. 43, 141-147 (2017).
30. Klus, S. et al. Data-driven model reduction and transfer operator approximation. Preprint at http://arXiv:1703.10112 (2017).
31. Noé, F. & Clementi, C. Kinetic distance and kinetic maps from molecular dynamics simulation. J. Chem. Theory Comput. 11, 5002-5011 (2015).
32. Noé, F., Banisch, R. & Clementi, C. Commute maps: separating slowly-mixing molecular configurations for kinetic modeling. J. Chem. Theory Comput. 12, 5620-5630 (2016).
33. Bowman, G. R., Pande, V. S. & Noé, F. in Advances in Experimental Medicine and Biology Vol. 797 An introduction to Markov state models and their application to long timescale molecular simulation (Springer, Heidelberg, 2014).
34. Husic, B. E. & Pande, V. S. Ward clustering improves cross-validated Markov state models of protein folding. J. Chem. Theory Comput. 13, 963-967 (2017).
35. Sheong, F. K., Silva, D.-A., Meng, L., Zhao, Y. & Huang, X. Automatic state partitioning for multibody systems (APM): an efficient algorithm for constructing Markov state models to elucidate conformational dynamics of multibody systems. J. Chem. Theory Comput. 11, 17-27 (2015).
36. Wu, H. & Noé, F. Gaussian Markov transition models of molecular kinetics. J. Chem. Phys. 142, 084104 (2015).
37. Weber, M., Fackeldey, K. & Schütte, C. Set-free Markov state model building. J. Chem. Phys. 146, 124133 (2017).
38. Bowman, G. R., Beauchamp, K. A., Boxer, G. & Pande, V. S. Progress and challenges in the automated construction of Markov state models for full protein systems. J. Chem. Phys. 131, 124101 (2009).
39. Trendelkamp-Schroer, B., Wu, H., Paul, F. & Noé, F. Estimation and uncertainty of reversible Markov models. J. Chem. Phys. 143, 174101 (2015).
40. Kube, S. & Weber, M. A coarse graining method for the identification of transition rates between molecular conformations. J. Chem. Phys. 126, 024103 (2007).
41. Yao, Y. et al. Hierarchical nyström methods for constructing Markov state models for conformational dynamics. J. Chem. Phys. 138, 174106 (2013).
42. Fackeldey, K. & Weber, M. Genpcca - Markov state models for non-equilibrium steady states. WIAS Rep. 29, 70-80 (2017).
43. Gerber, S. & Horenko, I. Toward a direct and scalable identification of reduced models for categorical processes. Proc. Natl Acad. Sci. USA 114, 4863-4868 (2017).
44. Hummer, G. & Szabo, A. Optimal dimensionality reduction of multistate kinetic and Markov-state models. J. Phys. Chem. B 119, 9029-9037 (2015).
45. Orioli, S. & Faccioli, P. Dimensional reduction of Markov state models from renormalization group theory. J. Chem. Phys. 145, 124120 (2016).
46. Noé, F., Wu, H., Prinz, J.-H. & Plattner, N. Projected and hidden Markov models for calculating kinetics and metastable states of complex molecules. J. Chem. Phys. 139, 184114 (2013).
47. Wu, H. & Noé, F. Variational approach for learning Markov processes from time series data. Preprint at http://arXiv:1707.04659 (2017).
48. McGibbon, R. T. & Pande, V. S. Variational cross-validation of slow dynamical modes in molecular kinetics. J. Chem. Phys. 142, 124105 (2015).
49. LeCun, Y., Bengio, Y. & Hinton, G. E. Deep learning. Nature 521, 436-444 (2015).
50. Krizhevsky, A., Sutskever, I. & Hinton, G. E. Imagenet classification with deep convolutional neural networks. In NIPS'12 Proceedings of the 25th International Conference on Neural Information Processing Systems Vol. 1, 1097-1105 (Curran Associates, Inc., 2012).
51. Mnih, V. et al. Human-level control through deep reinforcement learning. Nature 518, 529-533 (2015).
52. Perez-Hernandez, G. & Noé, F. Hierarchical time-lagged independent component analysis: computing slow modes and reaction coordinates for large molecular systems. J. Chem. Theory Comput. 12, 6118-6129 (2016).
53. Nüske, F., Schneider, R., Vitalini, F. & Noé, F. Variational tensor approach for approximating the rare-event kinetics of macromolecular systems. J. Chem. Phys. 144, 054105 (2016).
54. Koopman, B. Hamiltonian systems and transformations in hilbert space. Proc. Natl Acad. Sci. USA 17, 315-318 (1931).
55. Knoch, F. & Speck, T. Cycle representatives for the coarse-graining of systems driven into a non-equilibrium steady state. New J. Phys. 17, 115004 (2015).
56. Wang, H. & Schütte, C. Building Markov state models for periodically driven non-equilibrium systems. J. Chem. Theory Comput. 11, 1819-1831 (2015).
57. Horenko, I., Hartmann, C., Schütte, C., Noé, F. Data-based parameter estimation of generalized multidimensional Langevin processes. Phys. Rev. E 76, 016706 (2007).
58. Cybenko, G. Approximation by superpositions of a sigmoidal function. Math. Control Signals 2, 303-314 (1989).
59. Eigen, D., Rolfe, J., Fergus, R. & LeCun, Y. Understanding deep architectures using a recursive convolutional network. Preprint at http://arXiv:1312.1847 (2014).
60. Ranzato, M., Poultney, C., Chopra, S. & LeCun, Y. in Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems 18 (ed Platt, J. et al.) Efficient learning of sparse representations with an energy-based model (MIT Press, 2006).
61. Bengio, Y., Lamblin, P., Popovici, D. & Larochelle, H. in Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems 19, Vol. 19, 153 Greedy layer-wise training of deep networks (MIT Press, 2007).
62. Galen, A., Arora, R., Bilmes, J. & Livescu, K. Deep canonical correlation analysis. In ICML'13 Proceedings of the 30th International Conference on International Conference on Machine Learning Vol. 28, III-1247-III-1255 (2013).
63. Röblitz, S. & Weber, M. Fuzzy spectral clustering by PCCA+: application to Markov state models and data classification. Adv. Data Anal. Classif. 7, 147-179 (2013).
64. Sarich, M., Noé, F. & Schütte, C. On the approximation quality of Markov state models. Multiscale Model. Simul. 8, 1154-1177 (2010).
65. Noé, F., Schütte, C., Vanden-Eijnden, E., Reich, L. & Weikl, T. R. Constructing the full ensemble of folding pathways from short off-equilibrium simulations. Proc. Natl Acad. Sci. USA 106, 19011-19016 (2009).
66. Hahnloser, R. L. T. On the piecewise analysis of networks of linear threshold neurons. Neural Netw. 11, 691-697 (1998).
67. Nair, V. & Hinton, G. E. Rectified linear units improve restricted Boltzmann machines. In Proceedings of the 27th International Conference on Machine Learning (ICML-10) Vol. 27, 807-814 (ACM, New York, 2010).
68. Kingma, D. P. & Ba, J. Adam: a method for stochastic optimization. Preprint at http://arXiv.org:1412.6980 (2014).
69. Nüske, F., Wu, H., Wehmeyer, C., Clementi, C. & Noé, F. Markov state models from short non-equilibrium simulations - analysis and correction of estimation bias. Preprint at http://arXiv:1701.01665 (2017).
70. Wu, H., Paul, F., Wehmeyer, C. & Noé, F. Multiensemble Markov models of molecular thermodynamics and kinetics. Proc. Natl Acad. Sci. USA 113, E3221-E3230 (2016).
71. Wu, H., Mey, A. S. J. S., Rosta, E. & Noé, F. Statistically optimal analysis of state-discretized trajectory data from multiple thermodynamic states. J. Chem. Phys. 141, 214106 (2014).
72. Chodera, J. D., Swope, W. C., Noé, F., Prinz, J.-H. & Pande, V. S. Dynamical reweighting: improved estimates of dynamical properties from simulations at multiple temperatures. J. Phys. Chem. 134, 244107 (2011).
73. Prinz, J.-H. et al. Optimal use of data in parallel tempering simulations for the construction of discrete-state Markov models of biomolecular dynamics. J. Chem. Phys. 134, 244108 (2011).
74. Rosta, E. & Hummer, G. Free energies from dynamic weighted histogram analysis using unbiased Markov state model. J. Chem. Theory Comput. 11, 276-285 (2015).
75. Mey, A. S. J. S., Wu, H. & Noé, F. xTRAM: estimating equilibrium expectations from time-correlated simulation data at multiple thermodynamic states. Phys. Rev. X 4, 041018 (2014).
76. Olsson, S., Wu, H., Paul, F., Clementi, C. & Noé, F. Combining experimental and simulation data of molecular processes via augmented Markov models. Proc. Natl Acad. Sci. USA 114, 8265-8270 (2017).
77. Hinrichs, N. S. & Pande, V. S. Calculation of the distribution of eigenvalues and eigenvectors in Markovian state models for molecular dynamics. J. Chem. Phys. 126, 244101 (2007).
78. Noé, F. Probability distributions of molecular observables computed from Markov models. J. Chem. Phys. 128, 244103 (2008).
79. Chodera, J. D. & Noé, F. Probability distributions of molecular observables computed from Markov models. ii: Uncertainties in observables and their time-evolution. J. Chem. Phys. 133, 105102 (2010).
80. LeCun, Y., Bottou, L., Bengio, Y. & Haffner, P. Gradient-based learning applied to document recognition. Proc. IEEE 86, 2278-2324 (1998).
81. Schütt, K. T. et al. Moleculenet: a continuous-filter convolutional neural network for modeling quantum interactions. Preprint at http://arXiv:1706.08566 (2017).
82. Srivastava, N., Hinton, G., Krizhevsky, A., Sutskever, I. & Salakhutdinov, R. Dropout: a simple way to prevent neural networks from overfitting. J. Mach. Learn Res. 15, 1929-1958 (2014).
83. Chollet, F. et al. Keras. https://github.com/fchollet/keras (2015).
84. Abadi, M. et al. TensorFlow: large-scale machine learning on heterogeneous systems. Preprint at http://arXiv.org:1603.04467 (2015).