Optimizing the Edge Weights in Optimal Assignment Methods for Virtual Screening with Particle Swarm Optimization

Ligand-based virtual screening experiments are an important task in the early drug discovery stage. In such an experiment, a chemical database is searched for molecules with similar properties to a given query molecule. The optimal assignment approach for chemical graphs has proven to be a successful method for various cheminformatic tasks, such as virtual screening. The optimal assignment approach assumes all atoms of a query molecule to have the same importance. This assumption is not realistic in a virtual screening for ligands against a specific protein target. In this study, we propose an extension of the optimal assignment approach that allows for assigning different importance to the atoms of a query molecule by weighting the edges of the optimal assignment. Then, we show that particle swarm optimization is able to optimize these edge weights for optimal virtual screening performance. We compared the optimal assignment with optimized edge weights to the original version with equal weights on various benchmark data sets using sophisticated virtual screening performance metrics. The results show that the optimal assignment with optimized edge weights achieved a considerably better performance. Thus, the proposed extension in combination with particle swarm optimization is a valuable approach for ligand-based virtual screening experiments.

[1]  Andreas Zell,et al.  4D Flexible Atom-Pairs: An efficient probabilistic conformational space comparison for ligand-based virtual screening , 2011, J. Cheminformatics.

[2]  Andreas Zell,et al.  Optimal assignment kernels for attributed molecular graphs , 2005, ICML.

[3]  Hanna Geppert,et al.  Current Trends in Ligand-Based Virtual Screening: Molecular Representations, Data Mining Methods, New Application Areas, and Performance Evaluation , 2010, J. Chem. Inf. Model..

[4]  Andrew C. Good,et al.  Measuring CAMD technique performance: A virtual screening case study in the design of validation experiments , 2004, J. Comput. Aided Mol. Des..

[5]  Jeremy G. Vinter,et al.  FieldScreen: Virtual Screening Using Molecular Fields. Application to the DUD Data Set , 2008, J. Chem. Inf. Model..

[6]  J. Irwin,et al.  Benchmarking sets for molecular docking. , 2006, Journal of medicinal chemistry.

[7]  Alan F. Murray,et al.  IEEE International Conference on Neural Networks , 1997 .

[8]  Simona Distinto,et al.  Evaluation of the performance of 3D virtual screening protocols: RMSD comparisons, enrichment assessments, and decoy selection—What can we learn from earlier mistakes? , 2008, J. Comput. Aided Mol. Des..

[9]  Saeed Shiry Ghidary,et al.  Mobile robot global localization using differential evolution and particle swarm optimization , 2007, 2007 IEEE Congress on Evolutionary Computation.

[10]  Andreas Zell,et al.  Kernel Functions for Attributed Molecular Graphs – A New Similarity‐Based Approach to ADME Prediction in Classification and Regression , 2006 .

[11]  Christopher I. Bayly,et al.  Evaluating Virtual Screening Methods: Good and Bad Metrics for the "Early Recognition" Problem , 2007, J. Chem. Inf. Model..

[12]  J. Kennedy,et al.  Population structure and particle swarm performance , 2002, Proceedings of the 2002 Congress on Evolutionary Computation. CEC'02 (Cat. No.02TH8600).

[13]  María Cristina Riff,et al.  Towards an immune system that solves CSP , 2007, 2007 IEEE Congress on Evolutionary Computation.

[14]  Egon L. Willighagen,et al.  The Blue Obelisk—Interoperability in Chemical Informatics , 2006, J. Chem. Inf. Model..

[15]  Jürgen Bajorath,et al.  Integration of virtual and high-throughput screening , 2002, Nature Reviews Drug Discovery.

[16]  H. Kuhn The Hungarian method for the assignment problem , 1955 .

[17]  Andreas Zell,et al.  The EvA2 Optimization Framework , 2010, LION.

[18]  Andreas Zell,et al.  Interpreting linear support vector machine models with heat map molecule coloring , 2011, J. Cheminformatics.

[19]  Maurice Clerc,et al.  The particle swarm - explosion, stability, and convergence in a multidimensional complex space , 2002, IEEE Trans. Evol. Comput..

[20]  Ajay N. Jain,et al.  Recommendations for evaluation of computational methods , 2008, J. Comput. Aided Mol. Des..

[21]  Thomas Sander,et al.  Flexophore, a New Versatile 3D Pharmacophore Descriptor That Considers Molecular Flexibility , 2008, J. Chem. Inf. Model..

[22]  R. Storn,et al.  Differential Evolution - A simple and efficient adaptive scheme for global optimization over continuous spaces , 2004 .

[23]  Martin Middendorf,et al.  A Particle Swarm Optimizer for Finding Minimum Free Energy RNA Secondary Structures , 2007, 2007 IEEE Swarm Intelligence Symposium.

[24]  Andreas Bender,et al.  Molecular Similarity Searching Using Atom Environments, Information-Based Feature Selection, and a Naïve Bayesian Classifier , 2004, J. Chem. Inf. Model..

[25]  Andreas Bender,et al.  How Similar Are Similarity Searching Methods? A Principal Component Analysis of Molecular Descriptor Space , 2009, J. Chem. Inf. Model..

[26]  Andreas Zell,et al.  Optimal assignment methods for ligand-based virtual screening , 2009, J. Cheminformatics.

[27]  James Kennedy,et al.  Particle swarm optimization , 2002, Proceedings of ICNN'95 - International Conference on Neural Networks.