skip to main content
10.1145/3378904.3378920acmotherconferencesArticle/Chapter ViewAbstractPublication PagesbdetConference Proceedingsconference-collections
research-article

Molecular Similarity Searching Based on Deep Belief Networks with Different Molecular Descriptors

Authors Info & Claims
Published:09 April 2020Publication History

ABSTRACT

Molecular 2D similarity searching is one of the most widely used techniques for ligand-based virtual screening (LBVS). This study has used the concepts of deep learning by adapted deep belief networks (DBN) and data fusion concept with DBN to enhance the molecular similarity searching of chemical compounds in LBVS. The MDDR Datasets represented by different descriptors to convert the molecule shape to numerical values and each descriptor has different important features rather than the others. The DBN with data fusion is adapted to obtain a lower detection error probability and a higher reliability by using data from multiple distributed descriptors and analyzing the performance of combination and individual descriptors target by target and showed that the combination descriptor did better than both original descriptors. The overall results of this research showed that the use of DBN with data fusion in similarity-based is found to significantly outperform the conventional, industry-standard Tanimoto-based similarity search systems and some others benchmarks witch have been adapted by others researchers, with 1 % and 5% performance improvement in the average recall rates.

References

  1. Rollinger, J.M., H. Stuppner, and T. Langer, Virtual screening for the discovery of bioactive natural products, in Natural Compounds as Drugs Volume I. 2008, Springer. p. 211--249.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  2. Sirci, F., et al., Ligand-, structure-and pharmacophore-based molecular fingerprints: a case study on adenosine A1, A2A, A2B, and A3 receptor antagonists. Journal of computer-aided molecular design, 2012. 26(11): p. 1247--1266.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  3. Walters, W.P., M.T. Stahl, and M.A. Murcko, Virtual screening---an overview. Drug Discovery Today, 1998. 3(4): p. 160--178.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  4. Chen, C., et al., Combining structure-based pharmacophore modeling, virtual screening, and in silico ADMET analysis to discover novel tetrahydro-quinoline based pyruvate kinase isozyme M2 activators with antitumor activity. Drug design, development and therapy, 2014. 8: p. 1195.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  5. Drwal, M.N. and R. Griffith, Combination of ligand-and structure-based methods in virtual screening. Drug Discovery Today: Technologies, 2013. 10(3): p. e395-e401.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  6. Willett, P., Combination of similarity rankings using data fusion. Journal of chemical information and modeling, 2013. 53(1): p. 1--10.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  7. Klon, A.E., et al., Finding more needles in the haystack: A simple and efficient method for improving high-throughput docking results. Journal of medicinal chemistry, 2004. 47(11): p. 2743--2749.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  8. Chen, X. and C.H. Reynolds, Performance of similarity measures in 2D fragment-based similarity searching: comparison of structural descriptors and similarity coefficients. J Chem Inf Comput Sci, 2002. 42.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  9. Sakkiah, S., et al., Theoretical approaches to identify the potent scaffold for human sirtuin1 activator: Bayesian modeling and density functional theory. Medicinal Chemistry Research, 2014. 23(9): p. 3998--4010.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  10. Hall, D.L. and S.A. McMullen, Mathematical techniques in multisensor data fusion. 2004: Artech House.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  11. Liggins II, M., D. Hall, and J. Llinas, Handbook of multisensor data fusion: theory and practice. 2017: CRC press.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  12. Brey, R.L., et al., Neuropsychiatric syndromes in lupus: prevalence using standardized definitions. Neurology, 2002. 58(8): p. 1214--1220.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  13. LeCun, Y., Y. Bengio, and G. Hinton, Deep learning. Nature, 2015. 521(7553): p. 436--444.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  14. Maharani, D., H. Murfi, and Y. Satria, Performance of Deep Neural Network for Tabular Data A Case Study of Loss Cost Prediction in Fire Insurance. International Journal of Machine Learning and Computing, 2019. 9(6).Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  15. Ngiam, J., et al. Multimodal deep learning. in Proceedings of the 28th international conference on machine learning (ICML-11). 2011.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  16. Glorot, X. and Y. Bengio. Understanding the difficulty of training deep feedforward neural networks. in Proceedings of the Thirteenth International Conference on Artificial Intelligence and Statistics. 2010.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  17. Erhan, D., et al., Why does unsupervised pre-training help deep learning? Journal of Machine Learning Research, 2010. 11(Feb): p. 625--660.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  18. Le Roux, N. and Y. Bengio, Representational power of restricted Boltzmann machines and deep belief networks. Neural computation, 2008. 20(6): p. 1631--1649.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  19. Bengio, Y., Learning deep architectures for AI. Foundations and trends® in Machine Learning, 2009. 2(1): p. 1--127.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  20. Salido, J.A.A. and C. Ruiz, Using deep learning for melanoma detection in dermoscopy images. International Journal of Machine Learning and Computing, 2018. 8(1): p. 61--68.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  21. Hinton, G.E., S. Osindero, and Y.-W. Teh, A fast learning algorithm for deep belief nets. Neural computation, 2006. 18(7): p. 1527--1554.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  22. Rumelhart, D., McClelland. Parallel distributed processing. 1986, Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  23. Klinger, S. and J. Austin, Weighted superstructures for chemical similarity searching, in Proceedings of the 9th Joint Conference on Information Sciences. 2006.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  24. Arif, S.M., J.D. Holliday, and P. Willett. The Use of Weighted 2D Fingerprints in Similarity-Based Virtual Screening. in Elsevier Inc. 2016.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  25. Abdo, A. and N. Salim, New fragment weighting scheme for the bayesian inference network in ligand-based virtual screening. Journal of chemical information and modeling, 2010. 51(1): p. 25--32.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  26. Ahmed, A., A. Abdo, and N. Salim, Ligand-based Virtual screening using Bayesian inference network and reweighted fragments. The Scientific World Journal, 2012.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  27. Vogt, M., A.M. Wassermann, and J. Bajorath, Application of information---Theoretic concepts in chemoinformatics. Information, 2010. 1(2): p. 60--73.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  28. Unity. Tripos Inc.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  29. Matter, H. and T. Pötter, Comparing 3D pharmacophore triplets and 2D fingerprints for selecting diverse compound subsets. Journal of chemical information and computer sciences, 1999. 39(6): p. 1211--1225.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  30. James, C., D. Weininger, and J. Delany, Daylight theory manual. Daylight Chemical Information Systems. Inc., Irvine, CA, 1995.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  31. Xue, L., et al., Mini-fingerprints detect similar activity of receptor ligands previously recognized only by three-dimensional pharmacophore-based methods. Journal of chemical information and computer sciences, 2001. 41(2): p. 394--401.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  32. Xue, L., et al., Profile scaling increases the similarity search performance of molecular fingerprints containing numerical descriptors and structural keys. Journal of chemical information and computer sciences, 2003. 43(4): p. 1218--1225.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  33. Peng, Z., et al., Deep Boosting: Joint feature selection and analysis dictionary learning in hierarchy. Neurocomputing, 2016. 178: p. 36--45.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  34. Semwal, V.B., K. Mondal, and G.C. Nandi, Robust and accurate feature selection for humanoid push recovery and classification: deep learning approach. Neural Computing and Applications, 2017. 28(3): p. 565--574.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  35. Suk, H.-I., et al., Deep sparse multi-task learning for feature selection in Alzheimer's disease diagnosis. Brain Structure and Function, 2016. 221(5): p. 2569--2587.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  36. Zou, Q., et al., Deep learning based feature selection for remote sensing scene classification. IEEE Geoscience and Remote Sensing Letters, 2015. 12(11): p. 2321--2325.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  37. Ibrahim, R., et al. Multi-level gene/MiRNA feature selection using deep belief nets and active learning. in 2014 36th Annual International Conference of the IEEE Engineering in Medicine and Biology Society. 2014. IEEE.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  38. Dahl, G.E., N. Jaitly, and R. Salakhutdinov, Multi-task neural networks for QSAR predictions. arXiv preprint arXiv:1406.1231, 2014.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  39. Hamza, H., et al. Bioactivity Prediction Using Convolutional Neural Network. in International Conference of Reliable Information and Communication Technology. 2019. Springer.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  40. Unterthiner, T., et al. Deep learning as an opportunity in virtual screening. in Proceedings of the Deep Learning Workshop at NIPS. 2014.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  41. Unterthiner, T., et al., Toxicity prediction using deep learning. arXiv preprint arXiv:1503.01445, 2015.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  42. Ramsundar, B., et al., Massively multitask networks for drug discovery. arXiv preprint arXiv:1502.02072, 2015.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  43. Lusci, A., G. Pollastri, and P. Baldi, Deep architectures and deep learning in chemoinformatics: the prediction of aqueous solubility for drug-like molecules. Journal of chemical information and modeling, 2013. 53(7): p. 1563--1575.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  44. Duvenaud, D.K., et al. Convolutional networks on graphs for learning molecular fingerprints. in Advances in neural information processing systems. 2015.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  45. Nasser, M., et al. Deep Belief Network for Molecular Feature Selection in Ligand-Based Virtual Screening. in International Conference of Reliable Information and Communication Technology. 2018. Springer.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  46. Turtle, H. and W.B. Croft, Evaluation of an inference network-based retrieval model. ACM Transactions on Information Systems (TOIS), 1991. 9(3): p. 187--222.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  47. Bartell, B.T., G.W. Cottrell, and R.K. Belew. Automatic combination of multiple ranked retrieval systems. in SIGIR'94. 1994. Springer.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  48. Belkin, H.E., C.R. Kilburn, and B. De Vivo, Chemistry of the lavas and tephra from the recent (AD 1631-1944) Vesuvius (Italy) volcanic activity. 1993: US Department of the Interior, US Geological Survey.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  49. Hull, D.A., J.O. Pedersen, and H. Schütze. Method combination for document filtering. in Proceedings of the 19th annual international ACM SIGIR conference on Research and development in information retrieval. 1996. Citeseer.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  50. Ginn, C.M., P. Willett, and J. Bradshaw, Combination of molecular similarity measures using data fusion, in Virtual Screening: An Alternative or Complement to High Throughput Screening? 2000, Springer. p. 1--16.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  51. Croft, W.B., H.R. Turtle, and D.D. Lewis. The use of phrases and structured queries in information retrieval. in Proceedings of the 14th annual international ACM SIGIR conference on Research and development in information retrieval. 1991. ACM.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  52. Rajashekar, T. and W.B. Croft, Combining automatic and manual index representations in probabilistic retrieval. Journal of the American society for information science, 1995. 46(4): p. 272--283.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  53. Al-Dabbagh, M.M., et al., A quantum-based similarity method in virtual screening. Molecules, 2015. 20(10): p. 18107--18127.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  54. Himmat, M., et al., Adapting document similarity measures for ligand-based virtual screening. Molecules, 2016. 21(4): p. 476.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  55. Pipeline Pilot Software: SciTegic Accelrys Inc. http://www.accelrys.com/. San Diego Accelrys Inc; 2008.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  56. Semwal, V.B., K. Mondal, and G. Nandi, Robust and accurate feature selection for humanoid push recovery and classification: deep learning approach. Neural Computing and Applications, 2015: p. 1--10.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  57. Hinton, G., A practical guide to training restricted Boltzmann machines. Momentum, 2010. 9(1): p. 926.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  58. Yuan, C., X. Sun, and R. Lv, Fingerprint liveness detection based on multi-scale LPQ and PCA. China Communications, 2016. 13(7): p. 60--65.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar

Index Terms

  1. Molecular Similarity Searching Based on Deep Belief Networks with Different Molecular Descriptors

    Recommendations

    Comments

    Login options

    Check if you have access through your login credentials or your institution to get full access on this article.

    Sign in
    • Published in

      cover image ACM Other conferences
      BDET 2020: Proceedings of the 2020 2nd International Conference on Big Data Engineering and Technology
      January 2020
      126 pages
      ISBN:9781450376839
      DOI:10.1145/3378904

      Copyright © 2020 ACM

      Permission to make digital or hard copies of all or part of this work for personal or classroom use is granted without fee provided that copies are not made or distributed for profit or commercial advantage and that copies bear this notice and the full citation on the first page. Copyrights for components of this work owned by others than ACM must be honored. Abstracting with credit is permitted. To copy otherwise, or republish, to post on servers or to redistribute to lists, requires prior specific permission and/or a fee. Request permissions from [email protected]

      Publisher

      Association for Computing Machinery

      New York, NY, United States

      Publication History

      • Published: 9 April 2020

      Permissions

      Request permissions about this article.

      Request Permissions

      Check for updates

      Qualifiers

      • research-article
      • Research
      • Refereed limited
    • Article Metrics

      • Downloads (Last 12 months)11
      • Downloads (Last 6 weeks)1

      Other Metrics

    PDF Format

    View or Download as a PDF file.

    PDF

    eReader

    View online with eReader.

    eReader