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 *

325 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 24079540)

  • 1. The scoring of poses in protein-protein docking: current capabilities and future directions.
    Moal IH; Torchala M; Bates PA; Fernández-Recio J
    BMC Bioinformatics; 2013 Oct; 14():286. PubMed ID: 24079540
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 2. Boosted neural networks scoring functions for accurate ligand docking and ranking.
    Ashtawy HM; Mahapatra NR
    J Bioinform Comput Biol; 2018 Apr; 16(2):1850004. PubMed ID: 29495922
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 3. Target-specific native/decoy pose classifier improves the accuracy of ligand ranking in the CSAR 2013 benchmark.
    Fourches D; Politi R; Tropsha A
    J Chem Inf Model; 2015 Jan; 55(1):63-71. PubMed ID: 25521713
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 4. A machine learning approach for ranking clusters of docked protein-protein complexes by pairwise cluster comparison.
    Pfeiffenberger E; Chaleil RA; Moal IH; Bates PA
    Proteins; 2017 Mar; 85(3):528-543. PubMed ID: 27935158
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 5. iScore: a novel graph kernel-based function for scoring protein-protein docking models.
    Geng C; Jung Y; Renaud N; Honavar V; Bonvin AMJJ; Xue LC
    Bioinformatics; 2020 Jan; 36(1):112-121. PubMed ID: 31199455
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 6. Machine learning in computational docking.
    Khamis MA; Gomaa W; Ahmed WF
    Artif Intell Med; 2015 Mar; 63(3):135-52. PubMed ID: 25724101
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 7. Comparative assessment of scoring functions on an updated benchmark: 2. Evaluation methods and general results.
    Li Y; Han L; Liu Z; Wang R
    J Chem Inf Model; 2014 Jun; 54(6):1717-36. PubMed ID: 24708446
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 8. AutoDockFR: Advances in Protein-Ligand Docking with Explicitly Specified Binding Site Flexibility.
    Ravindranath PA; Forli S; Goodsell DS; Olson AJ; Sanner MF
    PLoS Comput Biol; 2015 Dec; 11(12):e1004586. PubMed ID: 26629955
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 9. Machine-learning scoring functions for identifying native poses of ligands docked to known and novel proteins.
    Ashtawy HM; Mahapatra NR
    BMC Bioinformatics; 2015; 16 Suppl 6(Suppl 6):S3. PubMed ID: 25916860
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 10. DeepBSP-a Machine Learning Method for Accurate Prediction of Protein-Ligand Docking Structures.
    Bao J; He X; Zhang JZH
    J Chem Inf Model; 2021 May; 61(5):2231-2240. PubMed ID: 33979150
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 11. The scoring bias in reverse docking and the score normalization strategy to improve success rate of target fishing.
    Luo Q; Zhao L; Hu J; Jin H; Liu Z; Zhang L
    PLoS One; 2017; 12(2):e0171433. PubMed ID: 28196116
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 12. Predicting protein conformational changes for unbound and homology docking: learning from intrinsic and induced flexibility.
    Chen H; Sun Y; Shen Y
    Proteins; 2017 Mar; 85(3):544-556. PubMed ID: 27862345
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 13. Sampling and Scoring in Protein-Protein Docking.
    Zięba A; Matosiuk D
    Methods Mol Biol; 2024; 2780():15-26. PubMed ID: 38987461
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 14. Energy-based graph convolutional networks for scoring protein docking models.
    Cao Y; Shen Y
    Proteins; 2020 Aug; 88(8):1091-1099. PubMed ID: 32144844
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 15. Forging the Basis for Developing Protein-Ligand Interaction Scoring Functions.
    Liu Z; Su M; Han L; Liu J; Yang Q; Li Y; Wang R
    Acc Chem Res; 2017 Feb; 50(2):302-309. PubMed ID: 28182403
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 16. A systematic analysis of scoring functions in rigid-body protein docking: The delicate balance between the predictive rate improvement and the risk of overtraining.
    Barradas-Bautista D; Moal IH; Fernández-Recio J
    Proteins; 2017 Jul; 85(7):1287-1297. PubMed ID: 28342242
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 17. DOCKGROUND protein-protein docking decoy set.
    Liu S; Gao Y; Vakser IA
    Bioinformatics; 2008 Nov; 24(22):2634-5. PubMed ID: 18812365
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 18. Rapid Design of Knowledge-Based Scoring Potentials for Enrichment of Near-Native Geometries in Protein-Protein Docking.
    Sasse A; de Vries SJ; Schindler CE; de Beauchêne IC; Zacharias M
    PLoS One; 2017; 12(1):e0170625. PubMed ID: 28118389
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 19. SCORCH: Improving structure-based virtual screening with machine learning classifiers, data augmentation, and uncertainty estimation.
    McGibbon M; Money-Kyrle S; Blay V; Houston DR
    J Adv Res; 2023 Apr; 46():135-147. PubMed ID: 35901959
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 20. ViTScore: A Novel Three-Dimensional Vision Transformer Method for Accurate Prediction of Protein-Ligand Docking Poses.
    Guo L; Qiu T; Wang J
    IEEE Trans Nanobioscience; 2023 Oct; 22(4):734-743. PubMed ID: 37159314
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

    [Next]    [New Search]
    of 17.