↓ Skip to main content

Congestion game scheduling for virtual drug screening optimization

Overview of attention for article published in Perspectives in Drug Discovery and Design, December 2017
Altmetric Badge

Mentioned by

twitter
1 X user

Citations

dimensions_citation
9 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
13 Mendeley
Title
Congestion game scheduling for virtual drug screening optimization
Published in
Perspectives in Drug Discovery and Design, December 2017
DOI 10.1007/s10822-017-0093-7
Pubmed ID
Authors

Natalia Nikitina, Evgeny Ivashko, Andrei Tchernykh

Abstract

In virtual drug screening, the chemical diversity of hits is an important factor, along with their predicted activity. Moreover, interim results are of interest for directing the further research, and their diversity is also desirable. In this paper, we consider a problem of obtaining a diverse set of virtual screening hits in a short time. To this end, we propose a mathematical model of task scheduling for virtual drug screening in high-performance computational systems as a congestion game between computational nodes to find the equilibrium solutions for best balancing the number of interim hits with their chemical diversity. The model considers the heterogeneous environment with workload uncertainty, processing time uncertainty, and limited knowledge about the input dataset structure. We perform computational experiments and evaluate the performance of the developed approach considering organic molecules database GDB-9. The used set of molecules is rich enough to demonstrate the feasibility and practicability of proposed solutions. We compare the algorithm with two known heuristics used in practice and observe that game-based scheduling outperforms them by the hit discovery rate and chemical diversity at earlier steps. Based on these results, we use a social utility metric for assessing the efficiency of our equilibrium solutions and show that they reach greatest values.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profile of 1 X user who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 13 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 13 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 3 23%
Student > Doctoral Student 2 15%
Student > Master 2 15%
Professor 1 8%
Lecturer 1 8%
Other 1 8%
Unknown 3 23%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Computer Science 3 23%
Engineering 2 15%
Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science 1 8%
Nursing and Health Professions 1 8%
Mathematics 1 8%
Other 2 15%
Unknown 3 23%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 1. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 26 December 2017.
All research outputs
#22,834,739
of 25,461,852 outputs
Outputs from Perspectives in Drug Discovery and Design
#868
of 949 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#387,985
of 448,237 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Perspectives in Drug Discovery and Design
#16
of 17 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,461,852 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 949 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 5.3. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% of its peers scored the same or lower than it.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 448,237 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 17 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.