Literature DB >> 14632437

Comparison of support vector machine and artificial neural network systems for drug/nondrug classification.

Evgeny Byvatov1, Uli Fechner, Jens Sadowski, Gisbert Schneider.   

Abstract

Support vector machine (SVM) and artificial neural network (ANN) systems were applied to a drug/nondrug classification problem as an example of binary decision problems in early-phase virtual compound filtering and screening. The results indicate that solutions obtained by SVM training seem to be more robust with a smaller standard error compared to ANN training. Generally, the SVM classifier yielded slightly higher prediction accuracy than ANN, irrespective of the type of descriptors used for molecule encoding, the size of the training data sets, and the algorithm employed for neural network training. The performance was compared using various different descriptor sets and descriptor combinations based on the 120 standard Ghose-Crippen fragment descriptors, a wide range of 180 different properties and physicochemical descriptors from the Molecular Operating Environment (MOE) package, and 225 topological pharmacophore (CATS) descriptors. For the complete set of 525 descriptors cross-validated classification by SVM yielded 82% correct predictions (Matthews cc = 0.63), whereas ANN reached 80% correct predictions (Matthews cc = 0.58). Although SVM outperformed the ANN classifiers with regard to overall prediction accuracy, both methods were shown to complement each other, as the sets of true positives, false positives (overprediction), true negatives, and false negatives (underprediction) produced by the two classifiers were not identical. The theory of SVM and ANN training is briefly reviewed.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  2003        PMID: 14632437     DOI: 10.1021/ci0341161

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  J Chem Inf Comput Sci        ISSN: 0095-2338


  65 in total

1.  Computational analysis of HIV-1 protease protein binding pockets.

Authors:  Gene M Ko; A Srinivas Reddy; Sunil Kumar; Barbara A Bailey; Rajni Garg
Journal:  J Chem Inf Model       Date:  2010-10-25       Impact factor: 4.956

2.  An automated PLS search for biologically relevant QSAR descriptors.

Authors:  Marius Olah; Cristian Bologa; Tudor I Oprea
Journal:  J Comput Aided Mol Des       Date:  2004 Jul-Sep       Impact factor: 3.686

3.  A support vector machine approach to classify human cytochrome P450 3A4 inhibitors.

Authors:  Jan M Kriegl; Thomas Arnhold; Bernd Beck; Thomas Fox
Journal:  J Comput Aided Mol Des       Date:  2005-03       Impact factor: 3.686

Review 4.  Molecular similarity and diversity in chemoinformatics: from theory to applications.

Authors:  Ana G Maldonado; J P Doucet; Michel Petitjean; Bo-Tao Fan
Journal:  Mol Divers       Date:  2006-02       Impact factor: 2.943

5.  AutoMotif Server for prediction of phosphorylation sites in proteins using support vector machine: 2007 update.

Authors:  Dariusz Plewczynski; Adrian Tkacz; Lucjan S Wyrwicz; Leszek Rychlewski; Krzysztof Ginalski
Journal:  J Mol Model       Date:  2007-11-08       Impact factor: 1.810

6.  kNNsim: k-nearest neighbors similarity with genetic algorithm features optimization enhances the prediction of activity classes for small molecules.

Authors:  Dariusz Plewczynski
Journal:  J Mol Model       Date:  2008-07-29       Impact factor: 1.810

7.  QSAR modeling: where have you been? Where are you going to?

Authors:  Artem Cherkasov; Eugene N Muratov; Denis Fourches; Alexandre Varnek; Igor I Baskin; Mark Cronin; John Dearden; Paola Gramatica; Yvonne C Martin; Roberto Todeschini; Viviana Consonni; Victor E Kuz'min; Richard Cramer; Romualdo Benigni; Chihae Yang; James Rathman; Lothar Terfloth; Johann Gasteiger; Ann Richard; Alexander Tropsha
Journal:  J Med Chem       Date:  2014-01-06       Impact factor: 7.446

8.  Prediction of carcinogenicity for diverse chemicals based on substructure grouping and SVM modeling.

Authors:  Kazutoshi Tanabe; Bono Lučić; Dragan Amić; Takio Kurita; Mikio Kaihara; Natsuo Onodera; Takahiro Suzuki
Journal:  Mol Divers       Date:  2010-02-26       Impact factor: 2.943

9.  Shallow Representation Learning via Kernel PCA Improves QSAR Modelability.

Authors:  Stefano E Rensi; Russ B Altman
Journal:  J Chem Inf Model       Date:  2017-08-07       Impact factor: 4.956

10.  Image-based clinical decision support for transrectal ultrasound in the diagnosis of prostate cancer: comparison of multiple logistic regression, artificial neural network, and support vector machine.

Authors:  Hak Jong Lee; Sung Il Hwang; Seok-Min Han; Seong Ho Park; Seung Hyup Kim; Jeong Yeon Cho; Chang Gyu Seong; Gheeyoung Choe
Journal:  Eur Radiol       Date:  2009-12-17       Impact factor: 5.315

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.