FLOG: A system to select ‘quasi-flexible’ ligands complementary to a receptor of known three-dimensional structure

By Michael D. Miller, S. Kearsley, D. Underwood, Robert P. Sheridan. 1994

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. Shengyou Huang
2. Xiaoqin Zou
3. Stefano Moro
4. Veronica Salmaso
5. Ruth Nussinov
6. Haim J. Wolfson
7. L. Ferreira
8. Glaucius Oliva

Citations in the corpus

• Molecular Docking and Structure-Based Drug Design Strategies (2015, methodology): “…eHiTS [28] AutoDock [34] FRED [30] Gold [35] Surflex-Dock [31] PRO_LEADS [44] DOCK [32] EADock [45] GLIDE [37] ICM [46] EUDOC [38] LigandFit [47] FlexX [39] Molegro Virtual Docker [48] Hammerhead [40] CDocker [49] Flog [41] GlamDock [50] SLIDE [42] PLANTS [51] ADAM [43] MolDock [52] MOE_Dock [53]”
• Bridging Molecular Docking to Molecular Dynamics in Exploring Ligand-Protein Recognition Process: An Overview (2018, background): “Examples are offered by FLOG (Miller et al., 1994), EUDOC (Pang et al.”
• Computational Methods in Drug Discovery (2014, methodology): “Fully automated “anchor and grow” methods have been implemented in several methods such as FLOG (Miller et al., 1994), SURFLEX (Jain, 2003), and SEED (Majeux et al., 2001).”
• Development and validation of a genetic algorithm for flexible docking. (1997, methodology): “Deterministic approaches include the FLOG system of Miller et al. (1994) and FLEXX of Rarey et al. (1996).”
• Principles of docking: An overview of search algorithms and a guide to scoring functions (2002, methodology): “The FLOG code 98 was used for the docking purpose.”