Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

[QUESTION]: Basic MolPal usage #48

Open
Tonylac77 opened this issue May 25, 2023 · 4 comments
Open

[QUESTION]: Basic MolPal usage #48

Tonylac77 opened this issue May 25, 2023 · 4 comments
Labels
question Further information is requested

Comments

@Tonylac77
Copy link

Tonylac77 commented May 25, 2023

First of all, I would like to thank you for your work with MolPal, I'm sure this will be very useful to the drug discovery community in the future.

I am trying to use your software to predict docking scores that have been generated by my own consensus docking pipeline .

I am struggling to understand (despite your very clear documentation) how I would go about this. If I understand correctly I would be using the lookup function of Molpal. However, when I look at your examples on GitHub (for example in /examples/objective/EnamineHTS_lookup.ini which points to /data/EnamineHTS_scores.csv.gz) it seems the software is looking at the entire libraries docking scores. Obviously, I am understanding something wrong here as the point is to have to dock only a small part of the library.

These are the two ways I understand this, feel free to let me know if I'm completely off with either of these...

  1. Assuming I dock 1% of the library to start with, I would then essentially train the model on that 1%, do one iteration of Molpal, then dock the compounds predicted to have good docking scores. Then repeat this process until I reach a total of 6 iterations as described in the paper?
  2. Alternatively, assuming I dock 1% of the library to start with, would I then run Molpal directly using this 1% as a lookup and not have to dock the suggested compounds (except if I wanted to check the performance of the prediction?). In this case, I don't fully grasp why there would be an option to 'retrain from scratch'.

I apologize if I am missing something obvious.

Thank you for your time and assistance.

@Tonylac77 Tonylac77 added the question Further information is requested label May 25, 2023
@kc-chong
Copy link

Any update? Have you managed to get the answer for this?

@connorcoley
Copy link
Collaborator

The --library setting is meant for retrospective evaluations and comparison of different settings and scoring functions.

In the README, we mention how to use the docking objective functions. An example of a configuration file is here.

If there is a different callable evaluation, you can use the DockingObjective class as a reference. It might take some tweaking to get this right, but it should be doable!

@kc-chong
Copy link

Hi @connorcoley Thanks for the prompt reply :)

@connorcoley
Copy link
Collaborator

Hopefully that promptness makes up for missing @Tonylac77 's original comment for over a year! (sorry)

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
question Further information is requested
Projects
None yet
Development

No branches or pull requests

3 participants