Accuracy of Prediction
References:
1. Kubinyi, H. Why models fail. http://americanchemicalsociety.mediasite.com/acs/viewer/?peid=7a194d47-baa9-4b2d-a823-1fd17bf5301c (accessed 21st September 2007).
2. Stouch, T. R.; Kenyon, J. R.; Johnson, S. R.; Chen, X.-Q.; Doweyko, A.; Li, Y. In Silico ADME/Tox: Why Models Fail. J. Comput.-Aided Mol. Des. 2003, 17, 83-92.
3. Tropsha, A.; Golbraikh, A. Predictive QSAR Modeling Workflow, Model Applicability Domains, and Virtual Screening. Curr. Pharm. Des. 2007, 13, in press.
4. Hawkins, D. M. The Problem of Overfitting. J. Chem. Inf. Comput. Sci. 2004, 44, 1-12.
5. Sheridan, R. P.; Feuston, B. P.; Maiorov, V. N.; Kearsley, S. K. Similarity to Molecules in the Training Set Is a Good Discriminator for Prediction Accuracy in QSAR. J. Chem. Inf. Comput. Sci. 2004, 44, 1912-1928.
6. Kubinyi, H.; Hamprecht, F. A.; Mietzner, T. Three-Dimensional Quantitative Similarity-Activity Relationships (3D QSiAR) from SEAL Similarity Matrices. J. Med. Chem. 1998, 41, 2553-2564.
7. Kubinyi, H. Validation and Predictivity of QSAR Models. In QSAR & Molecular Modelling in Rational Design of Bioactive Molecules (Proceedings of the 15th European Symposium on QSAR & Molecular Modelling, Istanbul, Turkey, 2004); Sener, E. A.; Yalcin, I. Eds.; CADDD Society: Ankara, Turkey, 2006; pp. 30-33.
8. Golbraikh, A.; Tropsha, A. Beware of q2! J. Mol. Graphics Modell. 2002, 20, 269-276.
9. Golbraikh, A.; Shen, M.; Xiao, Z.; Xiao, Y. D.; Lee, K. H.; Tropsha, A. Rational Selection of Training and Test Sets for the Development of Validated QSAR Models. J. Comput.-Aided Mol. Des. 2003, 17, 241-253.
10. Doweyko, A. 3D-QSAR Illusions. J. Comput.-Aided Mol. Des. 2004, 18, 587-596.
11. OECD Principles for the Validation, for Regulatory Purposes, of (Quantitative) Structure-Activity Relationship Models. http://www.oecd.org/dataoecd/33/37/37849783.pdf (accessed September 19, 2007).
12. Gramatica, P. Principles of QSAR Models Validation: Internal and External. QSAR Comb. Sci. 2007, 26(5) 694-701.
13. Tropsha, A.; Gramatica, P. Gombar, V. K. The Importance of Being Earnest: Validation is the Absolute Essential for Successful Application and Interpretation of QSPR Models. QSAR Comb. Sci., 2003, 22, 69-77.
14. Jorgensen, W. QSAR/QSPR and Proprietary Data. J. Chem. Inf. Model. 2006, 46, 937-937.
15. Editorial. QSAR/QSPR and Proprietary Data. J. Med. Chem. 2006, 49, 3431-3431.
16. Dogra, S.; Jamois, E. A Composite Predictability Metric that Combines Structure- and Descriptor-based Similarity into a Single Measure. Poster Presented at CHI’s Fourteenth Molecular Medicine Tri-Conference, San Francisco, CA, February 27 - March 2, 2007. QSARWorld, Poster Gallery. http://www.qsarworld.com/qsar-poster-gallery.php?mm=9 (accessed September 19, 2007).
17. Maggiora, G. M. On Outliers and Activity Cliffs - Why QSAR Often Disappoints. J. Chem. Inf. Model. 2006, 46, 1535-1535.
18. Clark, R. D. Validation and the Downside of the Law of Large Numbers. In Abstracts of Papers, 234th ACS National Meeting, Boston, MA, USA, August 19-23, 2007; American Chemical Society, Washington, DC, 2007; COMP-265.
19. Stouch, T. R. Private communication.
20. Huang, N.; Shoichet, B. K.; Irwin, J. J. Benchmarking Sets for Molecular Docking. J. Med. Chem. 2006, 49, 6789-6801.
21. DUD: a Directory of Useful Decoys. http://dud.docking.org/(accessed September 23, 2007).
22. Good, A. C. Virtual Screening Enrichment Studies: a Help or Hindrance in Tool Selection? In Abstracts of Papers, 234th ACS National Meeting, Boston, MA, USA, August 19-23, 2007; American Chemical Society, Washington, DC, 2007; COMP-266.
23. WOMBAT data presented in reference 22. http://dud.docking.org/wombat/ (accessed September 23, 2007).
|
