4.7 Article

Generative Models for De Novo Drug Design

期刊

JOURNAL OF MEDICINAL CHEMISTRY
卷 64, 期 19, 页码 14011-14027

出版社

AMER CHEMICAL SOC
DOI: 10.1021/acs.jmedchem.1c00927

关键词

-

资金

  1. National Natural Science Foundation of China [81773634]
  2. National Science & Technology Major Project Key New Drug Creation and Manufacturing Program of China [2018ZX09711002-001-003]
  3. Strategic Priority Research Program of the Chinese Academy of Sciences [XDA12020372]
  4. Tencent AI Lab Rhino-Bird Focused Research Program [JR202002]
  5. Shanghai Municipal Science and Technology Major Project

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Generative models in the field of artificial intelligence have made remarkable achievements in drug design, covering various models and applications. Through generative models, compounds can be generated to expand the compound library, design compounds with specific properties, and use some publicly available tools to directly generate molecules.
Artificial intelligence (AI) is booming. Among various AI approaches, generative models have received much attention in recent years. Inspired by these successes, researchers are now applying generative model techniques to de novo drug design, which has been considered as the holy grail of drug discovery. In this Perspective, we first focus on describing models such as recurrent neural network, autoencoder, generative adversarial network, transformer, and hybrid models with reinforcement learning. Next, we summarize the applications of generative models to drug design, including generating various compounds to expand the compound library and designing compounds with specific properties, and we also list a few publicly available molecular design tools based on generative models which can be used directly to generate molecules. In addition, we also introduce current benchmarks and metrics frequently used for generative models. Finally, we discuss the challenges and prospects of using generative models to aid drug design.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.7
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据