Abstract:Quantitative structure-activity relationship (QSAR) models have long been used for making predictions and data gap filling in diverse fields including medicinal chemistry, predictive toxicology, environmental fate modeling, materials science, agricultural science, nanoscience, food science, and so forth. Usually a QSAR model is developed based on chemical information of a properly designed training set and corresponding experimental response data while the model is validated using one or more test set(s) for which the experimental response data are available. However, it is interesting to estimate the reliability of predictions when the model is applied to a completely new data set (true external set) even when the new data points are within applicability domain (AD) of the developed model. In the present study, we have categorized the quality of predictions for the test set or true external set into three groups (good, moderate, and bad) based on absolute prediction errors. Then, we have used three criteria [(a) mean absolute error of leave-one-out predictions for 10 most close training compounds for each query molecule; (b) AD in terms of similarity based on the standardization approach; and (c) proximity of the predicted value of the query compound to the mean training response] in different weighting schemes for making a composite score of predictions. It was found that using the most frequently appearing weighting scheme 0.5-0-0.5, the composite score-based categorization showed concordance with absolute prediction error-based categorization for more than 80% test data points while working with 5 different datasets with 15 models for each set derived in three different splitting techniques. These observations were also confirmed with true external sets for another four endpoints suggesting applicability of the scheme to judge the reliability of predictions for new datasets. The scheme has been implemented in a tool "Prediction Reliability Indicator" available at http://dtclab.webs.com/software-tools and http://teqip.jdvu.ac.in/QSAR_Tools/DTCLab/, and the tool is presently valid for multiple linear regression models only.

Quantitative Structure-Activity Relationships (QSARs) for Materials Science

Quantitative Structure–activity Relationship: Promising Advances in Drug Discovery Platforms

Structure‐activity Relationship Approaches and Applications

Quantitative Sequence-Activity Model (qsam): Applying Qsar Strategy to Model and Predict Bioactivity and Function of Peptides, Proteins and Nucleic Acids

A Concise Review on role of QSAR in Drug Design

Comprehensive strategies of machine-learning-based quantitative structure-activity relationship models

Nano(Q)SAR: Challenges, Pitfalls and Perspectives

QSAR: Using the Past to Study the Present

Quantitative nanostructure-activity relationship modeling

Combinatorial synthesis for AI-driven materials discovery

How Precise Are Our Quantitative Structure-Activity Relationship Derived Predictions for New Query Chemicals?

QSAR Modeling: Where Have You Been? Where Are You Going To?

Automated Workflows for Data Curation and Machine Learning to Develop Quantitative Structure-Activity Relationships

Data flow modeling, data mining and QSAR in high-throughput discovery of functional nanomaterials

Deep Electron Cloud-activity and Field-activity Relationships

Quantitative Structure Activity Relationship Studies of Antimicrobial Compounds: A Review

Regression Methods For Developing Qsar And Qspr Models To Predict Compounds Of Specific Pharmacodynamic, Pharmacokinetic And Toxicological Properties

Thiosemicarbazone Derivatives in Search of Potent Medicinal Agents: QSAR Approach (A Review)

Comprehensive ensemble in QSAR prediction for drug discovery

Investigating 3D Atomic Environments for Enhanced QSAR

QComp: A QSAR-Based Data Completion Framework for Drug Discovery