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.
1019 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 24289493)
1. How diverse are diversity assessment methods? A comparative analysis and benchmarking of molecular descriptor space. Koutsoukas A; Paricharak S; Galloway WR; Spring DR; Ijzerman AP; Glen RC; Marcus D; Bender A J Chem Inf Model; 2014 Jan; 54(1):230-42. PubMed ID: 24289493 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
2. How similar are similarity searching methods? A principal component analysis of molecular descriptor space. Bender A; Jenkins JL; Scheiber J; Sukuru SC; Glick M; Davies JW J Chem Inf Model; 2009 Jan; 49(1):108-19. PubMed ID: 19123924 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
3. Diversity selection of compounds based on 'protein affinity fingerprints' improves sampling of bioactive chemical space. Nguyen HP; Koutsoukas A; Mohd Fauzi F; Drakakis G; Maciejewski M; Glen RC; Bender A Chem Biol Drug Des; 2013 Sep; 82(3):252-66. PubMed ID: 23647865 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
4. "Bayes affinity fingerprints" improve retrieval rates in virtual screening and define orthogonal bioactivity space: when are multitarget drugs a feasible concept? Bender A; Jenkins JL; Glick M; Deng Z; Nettles JH; Davies JW J Chem Inf Model; 2006; 46(6):2445-56. PubMed ID: 17125186 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
5. Bayesian screening for active compounds in high-dimensional chemical spaces combining property descriptors and molecular fingerprints. Vogt M; Bajorath J Chem Biol Drug Des; 2008 Jan; 71(1):8-14. PubMed ID: 18069988 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
6. Selecting optimally diverse compounds from structure databases: a validation study of two-dimensional and three-dimensional molecular descriptors. Matter H J Med Chem; 1997 Apr; 40(8):1219-29. PubMed ID: 9111296 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
8. Relationships between Molecular Complexity, Biological Activity, and Structural Diversity. Schuffenhauer A; Brown N; Selzer P; Ertl P; Jacoby E J Chem Inf Model; 2006; 46(2):525-35. PubMed ID: 16562980 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
9. Biodiversity of small molecules--a new perspective in screening set selection. Petrone PM; Wassermann AM; Lounkine E; Kutchukian P; Simms B; Jenkins J; Selzer P; Glick M Drug Discov Today; 2013 Jul; 18(13-14):674-80. PubMed ID: 23454345 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
10. Design and evaluation of a molecular fingerprint involving the transformation of property descriptor values into a binary classification scheme. Xue L; Godden JW; Stahura FL; Bajorath J J Chem Inf Comput Sci; 2003; 43(4):1151-7. PubMed ID: 12870906 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
11. In silico target predictions: defining a benchmarking data set and comparison of performance of the multiclass Naïve Bayes and Parzen-Rosenblatt window. Koutsoukas A; Lowe R; Kalantarmotamedi Y; Mussa HY; Klaffke W; Mitchell JB; Glen RC; Bender A J Chem Inf Model; 2013 Aug; 53(8):1957-66. PubMed ID: 23829430 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
12. PyDPI: freely available python package for chemoinformatics, bioinformatics, and chemogenomics studies. Cao DS; Liang YZ; Yan J; Tan GS; Xu QS; Liu S J Chem Inf Model; 2013 Nov; 53(11):3086-96. PubMed ID: 24047419 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
13. SABRE: ligand/structure-based virtual screening approach using consensus molecular-shape pattern recognition. Wei NN; Hamza A J Chem Inf Model; 2014 Jan; 54(1):338-46. PubMed ID: 24328054 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
14. In silico ADME modelling 2: computational models to predict human serum albumin binding affinity using ant colony systems. Gunturi SB; Narayanan R; Khandelwal A Bioorg Med Chem; 2006 Jun; 14(12):4118-29. PubMed ID: 16504519 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
15. Plate-based diversity selection based on empirical HTS data to enhance the number of hits and their chemical diversity. Sukuru SC; Jenkins JL; Beckwith RE; Scheiber J; Bender A; Mikhailov D; Davies JW; Glick M J Biomol Screen; 2009 Jul; 14(6):690-9. PubMed ID: 19531667 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
16. Flexophore, a new versatile 3D pharmacophore descriptor that considers molecular flexibility. von Korff M; Freyss J; Sander T J Chem Inf Model; 2008 Apr; 48(4):797-810. PubMed ID: 18393490 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
17. Prediction of new bioactive molecules using a Bayesian belief network. Abdo A; Leclère V; Jacques P; Salim N; Pupin M J Chem Inf Model; 2014 Jan; 54(1):30-6. PubMed ID: 24392938 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
18. Design of a general-purpose European compound screening library for EU-OPENSCREEN. Horvath D; Lisurek M; Rupp B; Kühne R; Specker E; von Kries J; Rognan D; Andersson CD; Almqvist F; Elofsson M; Enqvist PA; Gustavsson AL; Remez N; Mestres J; Marcou G; Varnek A; Hibert M; Quintana J; Frank R ChemMedChem; 2014 Oct; 9(10):2309-26. PubMed ID: 25044981 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
19. Design and evaluation of a novel class-directed 2D fingerprint to search for structurally diverse active compounds. Eckert H; Bajorath J J Chem Inf Model; 2006; 46(6):2515-26. PubMed ID: 17125192 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
20. Random or rational design? Evaluation of diverse compound subsets from chemical structure databases. Pötter T; Matter H J Med Chem; 1998 Feb; 41(4):478-88. PubMed ID: 9484498 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related] [Next] [New Search]