↓ Skip to main content

Filtered circular fingerprints improve either prediction or runtime performance while retaining interpretability

Overview of attention for article published in Journal of Cheminformatics, October 2016
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age

Mentioned by

twitter
4 X users

Readers on

mendeley
81 Mendeley
You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output. Click here to find out more.
Title
Filtered circular fingerprints improve either prediction or runtime performance while retaining interpretability
Published in
Journal of Cheminformatics, October 2016
DOI 10.1186/s13321-016-0173-z
Pubmed ID
Authors

Martin Gütlein, Stefan Kramer

Abstract

Even though circular fingerprints have been first introduced more than 50 years ago, they are still widely used for building highly predictive, state-of-the-art (Q)SAR models. Historically, these structural fragments were designed to search large molecular databases. Hence, to derive a compact representation, circular fingerprint fragments are often folded to comparatively short bit-strings. However, folding fingerprints introduces bit collisions, and therefore adds noise to the encoded structural information and removes its interpretability. Both representations, folded as well as unprocessed fingerprints, are often used for (Q)SAR modeling. We show that it can be preferable to build (Q)SAR models with circular fingerprint fragments that have been filtered by supervised feature selection, instead of applying folded or all fragments. Compared to folded fingerprints, filtered fingerprints significantly increase predictive performance and remain unambiguous and interpretable. Compared to unprocessed fingerprints, filtered fingerprints reduce the computational effort and are a more compact and less redundant feature representation. Depending on the selected learning algorithm filtering yields about equally predictive (Q)SAR models. We demonstrate the suitability of filtered fingerprints for (Q)SAR modeling by presenting our freely available web service Collision-free Filtered Circular Fingerprints that provides rationales for predictions by highlighting important structural features in the query compound (see http://coffer.informatik.uni-mainz.de). Circular fingerprints are potent structural features that yield highly predictive models and encode interpretable structural information. However, to not lose interpretability, circular fingerprints should not be folded when building prediction models. Our experiments show that filtering is a suitable option to reduce the high computational effort when working with all fingerprint fragments. Additionally, our experiments suggest that the area under precision recall curve is a more sensible statistic for validating (Q)SAR models for virtual screening than the area under ROC or other measures for early recognition.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 4 X users 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 81 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
United Kingdom 1 1%
Sweden 1 1%
Brazil 1 1%
Unknown 78 96%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 18 22%
Student > Master 14 17%
Researcher 11 14%
Student > Bachelor 9 11%
Professor > Associate Professor 4 5%
Other 11 14%
Unknown 14 17%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Chemistry 21 26%
Computer Science 17 21%
Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science 5 6%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 4 5%
Chemical Engineering 4 5%
Other 11 14%
Unknown 19 23%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 3. 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 03 January 2017.
All research outputs
#15,070,827
of 25,727,480 outputs
Outputs from Journal of Cheminformatics
#723
of 984 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#171,130
of 320,031 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Journal of Cheminformatics
#17
of 24 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,727,480 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 40th percentile – i.e., 40% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 984 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 10.1. This one is in the 25th percentile – i.e., 25% 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 320,031 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 46th percentile – i.e., 46% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 24 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 29th percentile – i.e., 29% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.