mlsanityData to 14 Oct 2026

Exploring QSAR Models for Activity-Cliff Prediction

arXiv 2301.13644 ↗First posted 31 Jan 2023cs.LG q-bio.BM stat.MLcited by 9

Not on the map. Why?

Abstract (arXiv)

Pairs of similar compounds that only differ by a small structural modification but exhibit a large difference in their binding affinity for a given target are known as activity cliffs (ACs). It has been hypothesised that quantitative structure-activity relationship (QSAR) models struggle to predict ACs and that ACs thus form a major source of prediction error. However, a study to explore the AC-prediction power of modern QSAR methods and its relationship to general QSAR-prediction performance is lacking. We systematically construct nine distinct QSAR models by combining three molecular representation methods (extended-connectivity fingerprints, physicochemical-descriptor vectors and graph isomorphism networks) with three regression techniques (random forests, k-nearest neighbours and multilayer perceptrons); we then use each resulting model to classify pairs of similar compounds as ACs or non-ACs and to predict the activities of individual molecules in three case studies: dopamine receptor D2, factor Xa, and SARS-CoV-2 main protease. We observe low AC-sensitivity amongst the tested models when the activities of both compounds are unknown, but a substantial increase in AC-sensitivity when the actual activity of one of the compounds is given. Graph isomorphism features are found to be competitive with or superior to classical molecular representations for AC-classification and can thus be employed as baseline AC-prediction models or simple compound-optimisation tools. For general QSAR-prediction, however, extended-connectivity fingerprints still consistently deliver the best performance. Our results provide strong support for the hypothesis that indeed QSAR methods frequently fail to predict ACs. We propose twin-network training for deep learning models as a potential future pathway to increase AC-sensitivity and thus overall QSAR performance.

Key facts. Cited by 9 papers in the map (data through 14 Oct 2026). Builds on 16 of its 86 references that are in the map. First posted on arXiv 31 Jan 2023.

Builds on

16 of 86 references.

References · 16

  1. 2019PyTorch: An Imperative Style, High-Performance Deep Learning Librarycited by 20,305
  2. 2016Semi-Supervised Classification with Graph Convolutional Networkscited by 11,361
  3. 2017Graph Attention Networkscited by 8,923
  4. 2015Batch Normalization: Accelerating Deep Network Training by Reducing Internal Covariate Shiftcited by 7,005
  5. 2018How Powerful are Graph Neural Networks?cited by 4,393
  6. 2017Neural Message Passing for Quantum Chemistrycited by 3,487
  7. 2019Optuna: A Next-generation Hyperparameter Optimization Frameworkcited by 2,501
  8. 2019Fast Graph Representation Learning with PyTorch Geometriccited by 2,434
  9. 2019Strategies for Pre-training Graph Neural Networkscited by 971
  10. 2015Convolutional Networks on Graphs for Learning Molecular Fingerprintscited by 754
  11. 2020ChemBERTa: Large-Scale Self-Supervised Pretraining for Molecular Property Predictioncited by 337
  12. 2020Molecular representation learning with language models and domain-relevant auxiliary taskscited by 94
4 more
  1. 2020AttentionDDI: Siamese Attention-based Deep Learning method for drug-drug interaction predictionscited by 7
  2. 2021Using Molecular Embeddings in QSAR Modeling: Does it Make a Difference?cited by 4
  3. 2019Graph-augmented Convolutional Networks on Drug-Drug Interactions Predictioncited by 3
  4. 2019Beyond Textual Data: Predicting Drug-Drug Interactions from Molecular Structure Images using Siamese Neural Networkscited by 1

Built on by

Cited by year (2026 to 14 Oct)

Citing papers per year: 2024: 5; 2025: 0; 2026: 4.

9 papers.