Literature DB >> 24899109

Confidence limits, error bars and method comparison in molecular modeling. Part 1: the calculation of confidence intervals.

A Nicholls1.   

Abstract

Computational chemistry is a largely empirical field that makes predictions with substantial uncertainty. And yet the use of standard statistical methods to quantify this uncertainty is often absent from published reports. This article covers the basics of confidence interval estimation for molecular modeling using classical statistics. Alternate approaches such as non-parametric statistics and bootstrapping are discussed.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2014        PMID: 24899109      PMCID: PMC4175406          DOI: 10.1007/s10822-014-9753-z

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


  16 in total

1.  Numerical errors and chaotic behavior in docking simulations.

Authors:  Miklos Feher; Christopher I Williams
Journal:  J Chem Inf Model       Date:  2012-03-13       Impact factor: 4.956

2.  The generalisation of student's problems when several different population variances are involved.

Authors:  B L WELCH
Journal:  Biometrika       Date:  1947       Impact factor: 2.445

3.  An approximate distribution of estimates of variance components.

Authors:  F E SATTERTHWAITE
Journal:  Biometrics       Date:  1946-12       Impact factor: 2.571

4.  UNIFORMLY MOST POWERFUL BAYESIAN TESTS.

Authors:  Valen E Johnson
Journal:  Ann Stat       Date:  2013       Impact factor: 4.028

5.  P values and statistical practice.

Authors:  Andrew Gelman
Journal:  Epidemiology       Date:  2013-01       Impact factor: 4.822

6.  SAMPL4, a blind challenge for computational solvation free energies: the compounds considered.

Authors:  J Peter Guthrie
Journal:  J Comput Aided Mol Des       Date:  2014-04-06       Impact factor: 3.686

7.  The meaning and use of the area under a receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curve.

Authors:  J A Hanley; B J McNeil
Journal:  Radiology       Date:  1982-04       Impact factor: 11.105

Review 8.  What do we know and when do we know it?

Authors:  Anthony Nicholls
Journal:  J Comput Aided Mol Des       Date:  2008-02-06       Impact factor: 3.686

9.  Structure-based design of estrogen receptor-beta selective ligands.

Authors:  Eric S Manas; Rayomand J Unwalla; Zhang B Xu; Michael S Malamas; Chris P Miller; Heather A Harris; Chulai Hsiao; Tatos Akopian; Wah-Tung Hum; Karl Malakian; Scott Wolfrom; Ashok Bapat; Ramesh A Bhat; Mark L Stahl; William S Somers; Juan C Alvarez
Journal:  J Am Chem Soc       Date:  2004-11-24       Impact factor: 15.419

10.  Why most published research findings are false.

Authors:  John P A Ioannidis
Journal:  PLoS Med       Date:  2005-08-30       Impact factor: 11.613

View more
  24 in total

1.  Presenting data in such a fashion that they can be used by other scientists.

Authors:  J Peter Guthrie
Journal:  J Comput Aided Mol Des       Date:  2015-09-22       Impact factor: 3.686

2.  The statistics of virtual screening and lead optimization.

Authors:  Mark McGann; Anthony Nicholls; Istvan Enyedy
Journal:  J Comput Aided Mol Des       Date:  2015-10       Impact factor: 3.686

3.  Assessment of uncertainty in chemical models by Bayesian probabilities: Why, when, how?

Authors:  Ullrika Sahlin
Journal:  J Comput Aided Mol Des       Date:  2014-12-10       Impact factor: 3.686

4.  Statistics in molecular modeling: a summary.

Authors:  Anthony Nicholls
Journal:  J Comput Aided Mol Des       Date:  2016-03-21       Impact factor: 3.686

5.  Differential effects of the dynein-regulatory factor Lissencephaly-1 on processive dynein-dynactin motility.

Authors:  Pedro A Gutierrez; Bryce E Ackermann; Michael Vershinin; Richard J McKenney
Journal:  J Biol Chem       Date:  2017-06-02       Impact factor: 5.157

6.  Relative Binding Free Energy Calculations Applied to Protein Homology Models.

Authors:  Daniel Cappel; Michelle Lynn Hall; Eelke B Lenselink; Thijs Beuming; Jun Qi; James Bradner; Woody Sherman
Journal:  J Chem Inf Model       Date:  2016-11-18       Impact factor: 4.956

7.  Measuring experimental cyclohexane-water distribution coefficients for the SAMPL5 challenge.

Authors:  Ariën S Rustenburg; Justin Dancer; Baiwei Lin; Jianwen A Feng; Daniel F Ortwine; David L Mobley; John D Chodera
Journal:  J Comput Aided Mol Des       Date:  2016-10-07       Impact factor: 3.686

8.  Scoring Functions for Protein-Ligand Binding Affinity Prediction using Structure-Based Deep Learning: A Review.

Authors:  Rocco Meli; Garrett M Morris; Philip C Biggin
Journal:  Front Bioinform       Date:  2022-06-17

9.  Consensus scoring evaluated using the GPCR-Bench dataset: Reconsidering the role of MM/GBSA.

Authors:  Mei Qian Yau; Jason S E Loo
Journal:  J Comput Aided Mol Des       Date:  2022-05-18       Impact factor: 4.179

10.  Consensus Virtual Screening Identified [1,2,4]Triazolo[1,5-b]isoquinolines As MELK Inhibitor Chemotypes.

Authors:  Anita Rácz; Roberta Palkó; Dorottya Csányi; Zsuzsanna Riedl; Dávid Bajusz; György M Keserű
Journal:  ChemMedChem       Date:  2021-10-19       Impact factor: 3.540

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.