Literature DB >> 18256892

Managing bias in ROC curves.

Robert D Clark1, Daniel J Webster-Clark.   

Abstract

Two modifications to the standard use of receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curves for evaluating virtual screening methods are proposed. The first is to replace the linear plots usually used with semi-logarithmic ones (pROC plots), including when doing "area under the curve" (AUC) calculations. Doing so is a simple way to bias the statistic to favor identification of "hits" early in the recovery curve rather than late. A second suggested modification entails weighting each active based on the size of the lead series to which it belongs. Two weighting schemes are described: arithmetic, in which the weight for each active is inversely proportional to the size of the cluster from which it comes; and harmonic, in which weights are inversely proportional to the rank of each active within its class. Either scheme is able to distinguish biased from unbiased screening statistics, but the harmonically weighted AUC in particular emphasizes the ability to place representatives of each class of active early in the recovery curve.

Mesh:

Year:  2008        PMID: 18256892     DOI: 10.1007/s10822-008-9181-z

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  J Comput Aided Mol Des        ISSN: 0920-654X            Impact factor:   3.686


  14 in total

1.  Protocols for bridging the peptide to nonpeptide gap in topological similarity searches.

Authors:  R P Sheridan; S B Singh; E M Fluder; S K Kearsley
Journal:  J Chem Inf Comput Sci       Date:  2001 Sep-Oct

2.  Ligand-based structural hypotheses for virtual screening.

Authors:  Ajay N Jain
Journal:  J Med Chem       Date:  2004-02-12       Impact factor: 7.446

3.  Glide: a new approach for rapid, accurate docking and scoring. 2. Enrichment factors in database screening.

Authors:  Thomas A Halgren; Robert B Murphy; Richard A Friesner; Hege S Beard; Leah L Frye; W Thomas Pollard; Jay L Banks
Journal:  J Med Chem       Date:  2004-03-25       Impact factor: 7.446

4.  Measuring CAMD technique performance: a virtual screening case study in the design of validation experiments.

Authors:  Andrew C Good; Mark A Hermsmeier; S A Hindle
Journal:  J Comput Aided Mol Des       Date:  2004 Jul-Sep       Impact factor: 3.686

5.  Virtual screening workflow development guided by the "receiver operating characteristic" curve approach. Application to high-throughput docking on metabotropic glutamate receptor subtype 4.

Authors:  Nicolas Triballeau; Francine Acher; Isabelle Brabet; Jean-Philippe Pin; Hugues-Olivier Bertrand
Journal:  J Med Chem       Date:  2005-04-07       Impact factor: 7.446

Review 6.  Comparing protein-ligand docking programs is difficult.

Authors:  Jason C Cole; Christopher W Murray; J Willem M Nissink; Richard D Taylor; Robin Taylor
Journal:  Proteins       Date:  2005-08-15

7.  A marriage made in torsional space: using GALAHAD models to drive pharmacophore multiplet searches.

Authors:  Jennifer K Shepphird; Robert D Clark
Journal:  J Comput Aided Mol Des       Date:  2006-10-03       Impact factor: 3.686

8.  Comparison of topological, shape, and docking methods in virtual screening.

Authors:  Georgia B McGaughey; Robert P Sheridan; Christopher I Bayly; J Chris Culberson; Constantine Kreatsoulas; Stacey Lindsley; Vladimir Maiorov; Jean-Francois Truchon; Wendy D Cornell
Journal:  J Chem Inf Model       Date:  2007-06-26       Impact factor: 4.956

9.  Optimization of CAMD techniques 3. Virtual screening enrichment studies: a help or hindrance in tool selection?

Authors:  Andrew C Good; Tudor I Oprea
Journal:  J Comput Aided Mol Des       Date:  2008-01-09       Impact factor: 3.686

10.  Aromatic interactions with phenylalanine 691 and cysteine 828: a concept for FMS-like tyrosine kinase-3 inhibition. Application to the discovery of a new class of potential antileukemia agents.

Authors:  Pascal Furet; Guido Bold; Thomas Meyer; Johannes Roesel; Vito Guagnano
Journal:  J Med Chem       Date:  2006-07-27       Impact factor: 7.446

View more
  27 in total

1.  A CROC stronger than ROC: measuring, visualizing and optimizing early retrieval.

Authors:  S Joshua Swamidass; Chloé-Agathe Azencott; Kenny Daily; Pierre Baldi
Journal:  Bioinformatics       Date:  2010-04-07       Impact factor: 6.937

2.  An economic framework to prioritize confirmatory tests after a high-throughput screen.

Authors:  S Joshua Swamidass; Joshua A Bittker; Nicole E Bodycombe; Sean P Ryder; Paul A Clemons
Journal:  J Biomol Screen       Date:  2010-06-14

3.  Do crystal structures obviate the need for theoretical models of GPCRs for structure-based virtual screening?

Authors:  Hao Tang; Xiang Simon Wang; Jui-Hua Hsieh; Alexander Tropsha
Journal:  Proteins       Date:  2012-03-13

4.  Enhancing the rate of scaffold discovery with diversity-oriented prioritization.

Authors:  S Joshua Swamidass; Bradley T Calhoun; Joshua A Bittker; Nicole E Bodycombe; Paul A Clemons
Journal:  Bioinformatics       Date:  2011-06-17       Impact factor: 6.937

5.  Rocker: Open source, easy-to-use tool for AUC and enrichment calculations and ROC visualization.

Authors:  Sakari Lätti; Sanna Niinivehmas; Olli T Pentikäinen
Journal:  J Cheminform       Date:  2016-09-07       Impact factor: 5.514

6.  Utility-aware screening with clique-oriented prioritization.

Authors:  S Joshua Swamidass; Bradley T Calhoun; Joshua A Bittker; Nicole E Bodycombe; Paul A Clemons
Journal:  J Chem Inf Model       Date:  2011-12-20       Impact factor: 4.956

7.  Autocorrelation descriptor improvements for QSAR: 2DA_Sign and 3DA_Sign.

Authors:  Gregory Sliwoski; Jeffrey Mendenhall; Jens Meiler
Journal:  J Comput Aided Mol Des       Date:  2015-12-31       Impact factor: 3.686

8.  Optimal assignment methods for ligand-based virtual screening.

Authors:  Andreas Jahn; Georg Hinselmann; Nikolas Fechner; Andreas Zell
Journal:  J Cheminform       Date:  2009-08-25       Impact factor: 5.514

9.  Influence relevance voting: an accurate and interpretable virtual high throughput screening method.

Authors:  S Joshua Swamidass; Chloé-Agathe Azencott; Ting-Wan Lin; Hugo Gramajo; Shiou-Chuan Tsai; Pierre Baldi
Journal:  J Chem Inf Model       Date:  2009-04       Impact factor: 4.956

10.  A statistical framework to evaluate virtual screening.

Authors:  Wei Zhao; Kirk E Hevener; Stephen W White; Richard E Lee; James M Boyett
Journal:  BMC Bioinformatics       Date:  2009-07-20       Impact factor: 3.169

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.