Why is Tanimoto index an appropriate choice for fingerprint-based similarity calculations?

Abstract

Background Cheminformaticians are equipped with a very rich toolbox when carrying out molecular similarity calculations. A large number of molecular representations exist, and there are several methods (similarity and distance metrics) to quantify the similarity of molecular representations. In this work, eight well-known similarity/distance metrics are compared on a large dataset of molecular fingerprints with sum of ranking differences (SRD) and ANOVA analysis. The effects of molecular size, selection methods and data pretreatment methods on the outcome of the comparison are also assessed. Results A supplier database ( https://mcule.com/ ) was used as the source of compounds for the similarity calculations in this study. A large number of datasets, each consisting of one hundred compounds, were compiled, molecular fingerprints were generated and similarity values between a randomly chosen reference compound and the rest were calculated for each dataset. Similarity metrics were compared based on their ranking of the compounds within one experiment (one dataset) using sum of ranking differences (SRD), while the results of the entire set of experiments were summarized on box and whisker plots. Finally, the effects of various factors (data pretreatment, molecule size, selection method) were evaluated with analysis of variance (ANOVA). Conclusions This study complements previous efforts to examine and rank various metrics for molecular similarity calculations. Here, however, an entirely general approach was taken to neglect any a priori knowledge on the compounds involved, as well as any bias introduced by examining only one or a few specific scenarios. The Tanimoto index, Dice index, Cosine coefficient and Soergel distance were identified to be the best (and in some sense equivalent) metrics for similarity calculations, i.e . these metrics could produce the rankings closest to the composite (average) ranking of the eight metrics. The similarity metrics derived from Euclidean and Manhattan distances are not recommended on their own, although their variability and diversity from other similarity metrics might be advantageous in certain cases ( e.g. for data fusion). Conclusions are also drawn regarding the effects of molecule size, selection method and data pretreatment on the ranking behavior of the studied metrics.

Cited by papers we hold 19

• Programming inactive RNA-binding small molecules into bioactive degraders · 2023
  No notice
• Artificial Intelligence and Machine Learning Technology Driven Modern Drug Discovery and Development · 2023
  No notice
• Quantitative non-targeted analysis: Bridging the gap between contaminant discovery and risk characterization · 2022
  Not checked
• A pocket-based 3D molecule generative model fueled by experimental electron density · 2022
  Not checked
• MMV560185 from pathogen box induces extrinsic pathway of apoptosis in Theileria annulata infected bovine leucocytes · 2022
  Not checked
• A Guide to In Silico Drug Design · 2022
  No notice
• MS2DeepScore: a novel deep learning similarity measure to compare tandem mass spectra · 2021
  No notice
• Spec2Vec: Improved mass spectral similarity scoring through learning of structural relationships · 2021
  No notice
• Towards an Understanding of the Mode of Action of Human Aromatase Activity for Azoles through Quantum Chemical Descriptors-Based Regression and Structure Activity Relationship Modeling Analysis · 2020
  Not checked
• Comprehensive prediction of secondary metabolite structure and biological activity from microbial genome sequences · 2020
  No notice
• The METLIN small molecule dataset for machine learning-based retention time prediction · 2019
  No notice
• Identification of Targetable Pathways in Oral Cancer Patients via Random Forest and Chemical Informatics · 2019
  Not checked
• Jaccard/Tanimoto similarity test and estimation methods for biological presence-absence data · 2019
  No notice
• The Light and Dark Sides of Virtual Screening: What Is There to Know? · 2019
  No notice
• Implicit-descriptor ligand-based virtual screening by means of collaborative filtering · 2018
  Not checked
• Recent applications of deep learning and machine intelligence on in silico drug discovery: methods, tools and databases · 2018
  No notice
• IMPPAT: A curated database of Indian Medicinal Plants, Phytochemistry And Therapeutics · 2018
  No notice
• Computer-Assisted Retrosynthesis Based on Molecular Similarity · 2017
  Not checked
• Predicting electronic structure properties of transition metal complexes with neural networks · 2017
  No notice

Reads

A person counts once a day per paper. We keep no cookie and no address: a reader is a hash that changes every day. Any month under five reads shows no number.