168 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 33641636)
1. An evaluation of combined strategies for improving the performance of molecular docking.
Xu S; Wang L; Pan X
J Bioinform Comput Biol; 2021 Apr; 19(2):2150003. PubMed ID: 33641636
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
2. Comprehensive evaluation of ten docking programs on a diverse set of protein-ligand complexes: the prediction accuracy of sampling power and scoring power.
Wang Z; Sun H; Yao X; Li D; Xu L; Li Y; Tian S; Hou T
Phys Chem Chem Phys; 2016 May; 18(18):12964-75. PubMed ID: 27108770
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
3. Improving docking results via reranking of ensembles of ligand poses in multiple X-ray protein conformations with MM-GBSA.
Greenidge PA; Kramer C; Mozziconacci JC; Sherman W
J Chem Inf Model; 2014 Oct; 54(10):2697-717. PubMed ID: 25266271
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
4. 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]
5. Statistical potential for modeling and ranking of protein-ligand interactions.
Fan H; Schneidman-Duhovny D; Irwin JJ; Dong G; Shoichet BK; Sali A
J Chem Inf Model; 2011 Dec; 51(12):3078-92. PubMed ID: 22014038
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
6. How Good Are Current Docking Programs at Nucleic Acid-Ligand Docking? A Comprehensive Evaluation.
Jiang D; Zhao H; Du H; Deng Y; Wu Z; Wang J; Zeng Y; Zhang H; Wang X; Wu J; Hsieh CY; Hou T
J Chem Theory Comput; 2023 Aug; 19(16):5633-5647. PubMed ID: 37480347
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
7. Efficient conformational sampling and weak scoring in docking programs? Strategy of the wisdom of crowds.
Chaput L; Mouawad L
J Cheminform; 2017 Jun; 9(1):37. PubMed ID: 29086077
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
8. Comparative assessment of scoring functions on a diverse test set.
Cheng T; Li X; Li Y; Liu Z; Wang R
J Chem Inf Model; 2009 Apr; 49(4):1079-93. PubMed ID: 19358517
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
9. Rescoring of docking poses under Occam's Razor: are there simpler solutions?
Zhenin M; Bahia MS; Marcou G; Varnek A; Senderowitz H; Horvath D
J Comput Aided Mol Des; 2018 Sep; 32(9):877-888. PubMed ID: 30173397
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
10. Comprehensive Evaluation of 10 Docking Programs on a Diverse Set of Protein-Cyclic Peptide Complexes.
Zhao H; Jiang D; Shen C; Zhang J; Zhang X; Wang X; Nie D; Hou T; Kang Y
J Chem Inf Model; 2024 Mar; 64(6):2112-2124. PubMed ID: 38483249
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
11. 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]
12. 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]
13. Comparative evaluation of 11 scoring functions for molecular docking.
Wang R; Lu Y; Wang S
J Med Chem; 2003 Jun; 46(12):2287-303. PubMed ID: 12773034
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
14. Comparative Assessment of Seven Docking Programs on a Nonredundant Metalloprotein Subset of the PDBbind Refined.
Çınaroğlu SS; Timuçin E
J Chem Inf Model; 2019 Sep; 59(9):3846-3859. PubMed ID: 31460757
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
15. Boosting Pose Ranking Performance via Rescoring with MM-GBSA.
Greenidge PA; Lewis RA; Ertl P
Chem Biol Drug Des; 2016 Sep; 88(3):317-28. PubMed ID: 27061970
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
16. 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]
17. DrugScore(CSD)-knowledge-based scoring function derived from small molecule crystal data with superior recognition rate of near-native ligand poses and better affinity prediction.
Velec HF; Gohlke H; Klebe G
J Med Chem; 2005 Oct; 48(20):6296-303. PubMed ID: 16190756
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
18. 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]
19. DSX: a knowledge-based scoring function for the assessment of protein-ligand complexes.
Neudert G; Klebe G
J Chem Inf Model; 2011 Oct; 51(10):2731-45. PubMed ID: 21863864
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
20. Are predefined decoy sets of ligand poses able to quantify scoring function accuracy?
Korb O; Ten Brink T; Victor Paul Raj FR; Keil M; Exner TE
J Comput Aided Mol Des; 2012 Feb; 26(2):185-97. PubMed ID: 22231069
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
[Next] [New Search]
