96 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 26583962)
1. Evaluation of GalaxyDock Based on the Community Structure-Activity Resource 2013 and 2014 Benchmark Studies.
Shin WH; Lee GR; Seok C
J Chem Inf Model; 2016 Jun; 56(6):988-95. PubMed ID: 26583962
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
2. GalaxyDock2: protein-ligand docking using beta-complex and global optimization.
Shin WH; Kim JK; Kim DS; Seok C
J Comput Chem; 2013 Nov; 34(30):2647-56. PubMed ID: 24108416
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
3. GalaxyDock BP2 score: a hybrid scoring function for accurate protein-ligand docking.
Baek M; Shin WH; Chung HW; Seok C
J Comput Aided Mol Des; 2017 Jul; 31(7):653-666. PubMed ID: 28623486
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
4. Combined Approach of Patch-Surfer and PL-PatchSurfer for Protein-Ligand Binding Prediction in CSAR 2013 and 2014.
Zhu X; Shin WH; Kim H; Kihara D
J Chem Inf Model; 2016 Jun; 56(6):1088-99. PubMed ID: 26691286
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
5. GalaxyDock: protein-ligand docking with flexible protein side-chains.
Shin WH; Seok C
J Chem Inf Model; 2012 Dec; 52(12):3225-32. PubMed ID: 23198780
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
6. Docking and Scoring with Target-Specific Pose Classifier Succeeds in Native-Like Pose Identification But Not Binding Affinity Prediction in the CSAR 2014 Benchmark Exercise.
Politi R; Convertino M; Popov K; Dokholyan NV; Tropsha A
J Chem Inf Model; 2016 Jun; 56(6):1032-41. PubMed ID: 27050767
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
7. CSAR Benchmark of Flexible MedusaDock in Affinity Prediction and Nativelike Binding Pose Selection.
Nedumpully-Govindan P; Jemec DB; Ding F
J Chem Inf Model; 2016 Jun; 56(6):1042-52. PubMed ID: 26252196
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
8. 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]
9. CSAR Benchmark Exercise 2013: Evaluation of Results from a Combined Computational Protein Design, Docking, and Scoring/Ranking Challenge.
Smith RD; Damm-Ganamet KL; Dunbar JB; Ahmed A; Chinnaswamy K; Delproposto JE; Kubish GM; Tinberg CE; Khare SD; Dou J; Doyle L; Stuckey JA; Baker D; Carlson HA
J Chem Inf Model; 2016 Jun; 56(6):1022-31. PubMed ID: 26419257
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
10. Blind Pose Prediction, Scoring, and Affinity Ranking of the CSAR 2014 Dataset.
Martiny VY; Martz F; Selwa E; Iorga BI
J Chem Inf Model; 2016 Jun; 56(6):996-1003. PubMed ID: 26391724
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
11. CSAR 2014: A Benchmark Exercise Using Unpublished Data from Pharma.
Carlson HA; Smith RD; Damm-Ganamet KL; Stuckey JA; Ahmed A; Convery MA; Somers DO; Kranz M; Elkins PA; Cui G; Peishoff CE; Lambert MH; Dunbar JB
J Chem Inf Model; 2016 Jun; 56(6):1063-77. PubMed ID: 27149958
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
12. Iterative Knowledge-Based Scoring Functions Derived from Rigid and Flexible Decoy Structures: Evaluation with the 2013 and 2014 CSAR Benchmarks.
Yan C; Grinter SZ; Merideth BR; Ma Z; Zou X
J Chem Inf Model; 2016 Jun; 56(6):1013-21. PubMed ID: 26389744
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
13. CSAR benchmark exercise 2011-2012: evaluation of results from docking and relative ranking of blinded congeneric series.
Damm-Ganamet KL; Smith RD; Dunbar JB; Stuckey JA; Carlson HA
J Chem Inf Model; 2013 Aug; 53(8):1853-70. PubMed ID: 23548044
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
14. Application of the docking program SOL for CSAR benchmark.
Sulimov AV; Kutov DC; Oferkin IV; Katkova EV; Sulimov VB
J Chem Inf Model; 2013 Aug; 53(8):1946-56. PubMed ID: 23829357
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
15. Incorporating specificity into optimization: evaluation of SPA using CSAR 2014 and CASF 2013 benchmarks.
Yan Z; Wang J
J Comput Aided Mol Des; 2016 Mar; 30(3):219-27. PubMed ID: 26879323
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
16. Automated large-scale file preparation, docking, and scoring: evaluation of ITScore and STScore using the 2012 Community Structure-Activity Resource benchmark.
Grinter SZ; Yan C; Huang SY; Jiang L; Zou X
J Chem Inf Model; 2013 Aug; 53(8):1905-14. PubMed ID: 23656179
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
17. Integration of Ligand and Structure Based Approaches for CSAR-2014.
Prathipati P; Mizuguchi K
J Chem Inf Model; 2016 Jun; 56(6):974-87. PubMed ID: 26492437
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
18. Choosing the Optimal Rigid Receptor for Docking and Scoring in the CSAR 2013/2014 Experiment.
Baumgartner MP; Camacho CJ
J Chem Inf Model; 2016 Jun; 56(6):1004-12. PubMed ID: 26222931
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
19. GalaxyDock3: Protein-ligand docking that considers the full ligand conformational flexibility.
Yang J; Baek M; Seok C
J Comput Chem; 2019 Dec; 40(31):2739-2748. PubMed ID: 31423613
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
20. Evaluation of the Wilma-SIE Virtual Screening Method in Community Structure-Activity Resource 2013 and 2014 Blind Challenges.
Hogues H; Sulea T; Purisima EO
J Chem Inf Model; 2016 Jun; 56(6):955-64. PubMed ID: 26282162
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
[Next] [New Search]
