Consensus scoring: A method for obtaining improved hit rates from docking databases of three-dimensional structures into proteins.

By P. Charifson, J. Corkery, Mark A. Murcko, W. Patrick Walters. 1999

How researchers see this paper

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

Molecular Docking and Structure-Based Drug Design Strategies (2015, methodology): “Therefore, the simultaneous use of different scoring methodologies has been increasingly employed as a way to obtain a consensus scoring [63].”
Virtual ligand screening: strategies, perspectives and limitations (2006, neutral): “Approaches have been taken notsimply to rely on one single function but to take on board the consensus picture of several scoring schemes [117,118].”
Insights into Protein–Ligand Interactions: Mechanisms, Models, and Methods (2016, methodology): “Because each scoring function has its own advantages and disadvantages, and none of them is perfect in terms of the accuracy and general applicability, the consensus scoring strategy has been introduced to improve the probability of finding correct solutions by combining the scores from multiple sco”
Assessing protein–ligand interaction scoring functions with the CASF-2013 benchmark (2018, background): “Since the early 2000s, many studies comparing docking/scoring methods have been published using this approach 20– 50 .”
Ensemble docking of multiple protein structures: Considering protein structural variations in molecular docking (2006, background): “44 Because the scoring function issue is beyond the scope of the present work, we considered the top five orientations instead of the top one for docking accuracy evaluations.”