arXiv subjects

Saiveth Hernandez-Hernandez

Publications and source records attributed to Saiveth Hernandez-Hernandez.

2 recordsLinked to original sources

arXiv2024

Data-centric challenges with the application and adoption of artificial intelligence for drug discovery

Introduction: Artificial intelligence (AI) is exhibiting tremendous potential to reduce the massive costs and long timescales of drug discovery. There are however important challenges currently limiting the impact and scope of AI models. Areas covered: In this perspective, the authors discuss a range of data issues (bias, inconsistency, skewness, irrelevance, small size, high dimensionality), how they challenge AI models, and which issue-specific mitigations have been effective. Next, they point out the challenges faced by uncertainty quantification techniques aimed at enhancing and trusting the predictions from these AI models. They also discuss how conceptual errors, unrealistic benchmarks and performance misestimation can confound the evaluation of models and thus their development. Lastly, the authors explain how human bias, whether from AI experts or drug discovery experts, constitutes another challenge that can be alleviated by gaining more prospective experience. Expert opinion: AI models are often developed to excel on retrospective benchmarks unlikely to anticipate their prospective performance. As a result, only a few of these models are ever reported to have prospective value (e.g. by discovering potent and innovative drug leads for a therapeutic target). The authors have discussed what can go wrong in practice with AI for drug discovery. We hope that this will help inform the decisions of editors, funders investors and researchers working in this area.

q-bio.OT↗

arXiv2024

Scaffold Splits Overestimate Virtual Screening Performance

Virtual Screening (VS) of vast compound libraries guided by Artificial Intelligence (AI) models is a highly productive approach to early drug discovery. Data splitting is crucial for better benchmarking of such AI models. Traditional random data splits produce similar molecules between training and test sets, conflicting with the reality of VS libraries which mostly contain structurally distinct compounds. Scaffold split, grouping molecules by shared core structure, is widely considered to reflect this real-world scenario. However, here we show that the scaffold split also overestimates VS performance. The reason is that molecules with different chemical scaffolds are often similar, which hence introduces unrealistically high similarities between training molecules and test molecules following a scaffold split. Our study examined three representative AI models on 60 NCI-60 datasets, each with approximately 30,000 to 50,000 molecules tested on a different cancer cell line. Each dataset was split with three methods: scaffold, Butina clustering and the more accurate Uniform Manifold Approximation and Projection (UMAP) clustering. Regardless of the model, model performance is much worse with UMAP splits from the results of the 2100 models trained and evaluated for each algorithm and split. These robust results demonstrate the need for more realistic data splits to tune, compare, and select models for VS. For the same reason, avoiding the scaffold split is also recommended for other molecular property prediction problems. The code to reproduce these results is available at https://github.com/ScaffoldSplitsOverestimateVS

q-bio.QM↗