Using a genetic algorithm to identify common structural features in sets of ligands.

By John D. Holliday, P. Willett. 1997

Subfields: Computational Chemistry & Drug Discovery

How researchers see this paper

The researchers whose trusted networks rank it highest, strongest advocate first. Every researcher gets a different order.

In Computational Chemistry & Drug Discovery

1. Dina Schneidman-Duhovny
2. Buyong Ma
3. Glaucius Oliva
4. Haim J. Wolfson
5. Ruth Nussinov
6. Adriano Defini Andricopulo
7. Yuval Inbar
8. L. Ferreira

Citations in the corpus

• Molecular Docking and Structure-Based Drug Design Strategies (2015, background): “…[154,155] HypoGen [141] ALADDIN [156] HypoRefine [141] RAPID [157] GASP [142,143] DANTE [158] DiscoTech [143,144] APOLLO [159] GALAHAD [143,145] CLEW [160] LigandScout [146,147] MPHIL [161] MOE [148,149] GAMMA [162] PHASE [150,151] SCAMPI [163] XED [152,153] Apex-3D [164] LigBuilder [165,166]”
• Principles of docking: An overview of search algorithms and a guide to scoring functions (2002, background): “174,175 The earliest yet most rigorous multiple approaches have been suggested by Brint and Willet, 174 based on an algorithm by Crandell and Smith.”
• PharmaGist: a webserver for ligand-based pharmacophore detection (2008, methodology): “Examples for such methods include RAPID (8), MPHIL (9) and the commercial programs DISCO (10), Phase (11) of Schrodinger and HipHop and HypoGen, which are part of the Catalyst software package of Accelrys (12–16).”