Abstract
AbstractWith the increase in applications of machine learning methods in drug design and related fields, the challenge of designing sound test sets becomes more and more prominent. The goal of this challenge is to have a realistic split of chemical structures (compounds) between training, validation and test set such that the performance on the test set is meaningful to infer the performance in a prospective application. This challenge is by its own very interesting and relevant, but is even more complex in a federated machine learning approach where multiple partners jointly train a model under privacy-preserving conditions where chemical structures must not be shared between the different participating parties. In this work we discuss three methods which provide a splitting of a data set and are applicable in a federated privacy-preserving setting, namely: a. locality-sensitive hashing (LSH), b. sphere exclusion clustering, c. scaffold-based binning (scaffold network). For evaluation of these splitting methods we consider the following quality criteria (compared to random splitting): bias in prediction performance, classification label and data imbalance, similarity distance between the test and training set compounds. The main findings of the paper are a. both sphere exclusion clustering and scaffold-based binning result in high quality splitting of the data sets, b. in terms of compute costs sphere exclusion clustering is very expensive in the case of federated privacy-preserving setting.
Funder
innovative medicines initiative
Publisher
Springer Science and Business Media LLC
Subject
Library and Information Sciences,Computer Graphics and Computer-Aided Design,Physical and Theoretical Chemistry,Computer Science Applications
Reference30 articles.
1. Bishop CM (2006) Pattern recognition and machine learning. Springer, New York
2. Kubinyi H (2002) From narcosis to hyperspace: the history of QSAR. QSAR 21(4):348–356
3. Van Drie JH (2003) Pharmacophore discovery: a critical review. In: Bultinck P, De Winter H, Langenaeker W (eds) Computational medicinal chemistry and drug discovery, 2nd edn. Dekker, New York, pp 437–460
4. Lombardo F, Obach RS, Shalaeva MY, Gao F (2004) Prediction of human volume of distribution values for neutral and basic drugs. 2. Extended data set and leave-class-out statistics. J Med Chem 47(5):1242–1250. https://doi.org/10.1021/jm030408h
5. Martin EJ, Polyakov VR, Tian L, Perez RC (2017) Profile-QSAR 2.0: kinase virtual screening accuracy comparable to four-concentration IC50s for Realistically novel compounds. J Chem Inf Model 57(8):2077–2088. https://doi.org/10.1021/acs.jcim.7b00166