ArticleJournal of chemical information and modeling2025
Comparative Analysis of Quantum-Mechanical and Standard Single-Structure Protein-Ligand Scoring Functions with MD-Based Free Energy Calculations.
Article in Journal of chemical information and modeling, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
3 citing papers in PubMed.
- Quantum-Driven High-Throughput Docking: Advances in Molecular Scoring and Drug Discovery.Methods in molecular biology (Clifton, N.J.) · 2026Review
- Evaluation of Protein-Ligand binding interactions of alkaline phosphatase inhibitors by Quantum-Mechanical methods.Journal of computer-aided molecular design · 2025Article
- Fragme∩t: An Open-Source Framework for Multiscale Quantum Chemistry Based on Fragmentation.Wiley interdisciplinary reviews. Computational molecular scienceArticle
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Single-structure scoring functions have been considered inferior to expensive ensemble free energy methods in predicting protein-ligand affinities. We are revisiting this dogma with the recently developed semiempirical quantum-mechanical (SQM)-based scoring function, SQM2.20, comparing its performance to the standard scoring functions on one hand and state-of-the-art molecular dynamics (MD)-based free-energy methods on the other hand. The comparison is conducted on a well-established Wang data set comprising eight protein targets with 200 ligands. The initial low correlation of SQM2.20 scores with the experimental binding affinities of
Indexed as
Identifiers
What Socratic holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the Socratic graph.