These tools will no longer be maintained as of December 31, 2024. Archived website can be found here. PubMed4Hh GitHub repository can be found here. Contact NLM Customer Service if you have questions.


BIOMARKERS

Molecular Biopsy of Human Tumors

- a resource for Precision Medicine *

77 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 17270866)

  • 1. Optimal nonlinear scoring function for global fitness landscape of protein design.
    Hu C; Li X; Liang J
    Conf Proc IEEE Eng Med Biol Soc; 2004; 2004():2828-31. PubMed ID: 17270866
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 2. Developing optimal non-linear scoring function for protein design.
    Hu C; Li X; Liang J
    Bioinformatics; 2004 Nov; 20(17):3080-98. PubMed ID: 15217818
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 3. On simplified global nonlinear function for fitness landscape: a case study of inverse protein folding.
    Xu Y; Hu C; Dai Y; Liang J
    PLoS One; 2014; 9(8):e104403. PubMed ID: 25110986
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 4. Binding energy landscape analysis helps to discriminate true hits from high-scoring decoys in virtual screening.
    Wei D; Zheng H; Su N; Deng M; Lai L
    J Chem Inf Model; 2010 Oct; 50(10):1855-64. PubMed ID: 20968314
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 5. Discrimination of Native-like States of Membrane Proteins with Implicit Membrane-based Scoring Functions.
    Dutagaci B; Wittayanarakul K; Mori T; Feig M
    J Chem Theory Comput; 2017 Jun; 13(6):3049-3059. PubMed ID: 28475346
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 6. Distinguishing native conformations of proteins from decoys with an effective free energy estimator based on the OPLS all-atom force field and the Surface Generalized Born solvent model.
    Felts AK; Gallicchio E; Wallqvist A; Levy RM
    Proteins; 2002 Aug; 48(2):404-22. PubMed ID: 12112706
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 7. FURSMASA: a new approach to rapid scoring functions that uses a MD-averaged potential energy grid and a solvent-accessible surface area term with parameters GA fit to experimental data.
    Pearlman DA; Rao BG; Charifson P
    Proteins; 2008 May; 71(3):1519-38. PubMed ID: 18300249
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 8. Protein structure evaluation using an all-atom energy based empirical scoring function.
    Narang P; Bhushan K; Bose S; Jayaram B
    J Biomol Struct Dyn; 2006 Feb; 23(4):385-406. PubMed ID: 16363875
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 9. ProVal: a protein-scoring function for the selection of native and near-native folds.
    Berglund A; Head RD; Welsh EA; Marshall GR
    Proteins; 2004 Feb; 54(2):289-302. PubMed ID: 14696191
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 10. Discrimination of native loop conformations in membrane proteins: decoy library design and evaluation of effective energy scoring functions.
    Forrest LR; Woolf TB
    Proteins; 2003 Sep; 52(4):492-509. PubMed ID: 12910450
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 11. Assessment of semiempirical enthalpy of formation in solution as an effective energy function to discriminate native-like structures in protein decoy sets.
    Urquiza-Carvalho GA; Fragoso WD; Rocha GB
    J Comput Chem; 2016 Aug; 37(21):1962-72. PubMed ID: 27249629
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 12. Network properties of protein-decoy structures.
    Chatterjee S; Bhattacharyya M; Vishveshwara S
    J Biomol Struct Dyn; 2012; 29(6):606-22. PubMed ID: 22545992
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 13. Consensus scoring for enriching near-native structures from protein-protein docking decoys.
    Liang S; Meroueh SO; Wang G; Qiu C; Zhou Y
    Proteins; 2009 May; 75(2):397-403. PubMed ID: 18831053
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 14. Physical scoring function based on AMBER force field and Poisson-Boltzmann implicit solvent for protein structure prediction.
    Hsieh MJ; Luo R
    Proteins; 2004 Aug; 56(3):475-86. PubMed ID: 15229881
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 15. Assessing scoring functions for protein-ligand interactions.
    Ferrara P; Gohlke H; Price DJ; Klebe G; Brooks CL
    J Med Chem; 2004 Jun; 47(12):3032-47. PubMed ID: 15163185
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 16. Scoring functions for de novo protein structure prediction revisited.
    Ngan SC; Hung LH; Liu T; Samudrala R
    Methods Mol Biol; 2008; 413():243-81. PubMed ID: 18075169
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 17. Assessment of Semiempirical Quantum Mechanical Methods for the Evaluation of Protein Structures.
    Wollacott AM; Merz KM
    J Chem Theory Comput; 2007; 3(4):1609-1619. PubMed ID: 18728758
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 18. Energy functions that discriminate X-ray and near native folds from well-constructed decoys.
    Park B; Levitt M
    J Mol Biol; 1996 May; 258(2):367-92. PubMed ID: 8627632
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 19. Using a hydrophobic contact potential to evaluate native and near-native folds generated by molecular dynamics simulations.
    Huang ES; Subbiah S; Tsai J; Levitt M
    J Mol Biol; 1996 Apr; 257(3):716-25. PubMed ID: 8648635
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 20. Design of an optimal Chebyshev-expanded discrimination function for globular proteins.
    Fain B; Xia Y; Levitt M
    Protein Sci; 2002 Aug; 11(8):2010-21. PubMed ID: 12142455
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

    [Next]    [New Search]
    of 4.