Jove
Visualize
Contact Us
JoVE
x logofacebook logolinkedin logoyoutube logo
ABOUT JoVE
OverviewLeadershipBlogJoVE Help Center
AUTHORS
Publishing ProcessEditorial BoardScope & PoliciesPeer ReviewFAQSubmit
LIBRARIANS
TestimonialsSubscriptionsAccessResourcesLibrary Advisory BoardFAQ
RESEARCH
JoVE JournalMethods CollectionsJoVE Encyclopedia of ExperimentsArchive
EDUCATION
JoVE CoreJoVE BusinessJoVE Science EducationJoVE Lab ManualFaculty Resource CenterFaculty Site
Terms & Conditions of Use
Privacy Policy
Policies

Related Concept Videos

The Equilibrium Binding Constant and Binding Strength02:18

The Equilibrium Binding Constant and Binding Strength

12.9K
The equilibrium binding constant (Kb) quantifies the strength of a protein-ligand interaction. Kb can be calculated as follows when the reaction is at equilibrium:
12.9K
Conserved Binding Sites01:49

Conserved Binding Sites

4.2K
Many proteins’ biological role depends on their interactions with their ligands, small molecules that bind to specific locations on the protein known as ligand-binding sites. Ligand-binding sites are often conserved among homologous proteins as these sites are critical for protein function.
Binding sites are often located in large pockets, and if their location on a protein’s surface is unknown, it can be predicted using various approaches. The energetic method computationally...
4.2K
Mechanistic Models: Compartment Models in Algorithms for Numerical Problem Solving01:29

Mechanistic Models: Compartment Models in Algorithms for Numerical Problem Solving

54
Mechanistic models play a crucial role in algorithms for numerical problem-solving, particularly in nonlinear mixed effects modeling (NMEM). These models aim to minimize specific objective functions by evaluating various parameter estimates, leading to the development of systematic algorithms. In some cases, linearization techniques approximate the model using linear equations.
In individual population analyses, different algorithms are employed, such as Cauchy's method, which uses a...
54
Calculating Standard Free Energy Changes02:49

Calculating Standard Free Energy Changes

21.3K
The free energy change for a reaction that occurs under the standard conditions of 1 bar pressure and at 298 K is called the standard free energy change. Since free energy is a state function, its value depends only on the conditions of the initial and final states of the system. A convenient and common approach to the calculation of free energy changes for physical and chemical reactions is by use of widely available compilations of standard state thermodynamic data. One method involves the...
21.3K
Noncovalent Attractions in Biomolecules02:35

Noncovalent Attractions in Biomolecules

50.7K
Noncovalent attractions are associations within and between molecules that influence the shape and structural stability of complexes. These interactions differ from covalent bonding in that they do not involve sharing of electrons.
Four types of noncovalent interactions are hydrogen bonds, van der Waals forces, ionic bonds, and hydrophobic interactions.
Hydrogen bonding results from the electrostatic attraction of a hydrogen atom covalently bonded to a strong-electronegative atom like oxygen,...
50.7K
Force and Potential Energy in One Dimension01:13

Force and Potential Energy in One Dimension

5.4K
Force can be calculated from the expression for potential energy, which is a function of position. The component of a conservative force, in a particular direction, equals the negative of the derivative of the corresponding potential energy with respect to the displacement in that direction. For regions where potential energy changes rapidly with displacement, the work done and force is maximum. Also, when force is applied along the positive coordinate axis, the potential energy decreases with...
5.4K

You might also read

Related Articles

Articles linked to this work by shared authors, journal, and citation graph.

Sort by
Same author

Large-Scale Collaborative Assessment of Binding Free Energy Calculations for Drug Discovery Using OpenFE.

Journal of chemical information and modeling·2026
Same author

Leveraging Kinase Drugs for Neurosciences: Discovery of Selective, CNS-Penetrant Reversible Bruton's Tyrosine Kinase Inhibitors as Therapeutics for Neuroinflammation.

Journal of medicinal chemistry·2026
Same author

Application of protein language models for antibody developability prediction.

mAbs·2026
Same author

Discovery and Optimization of Thienopyrazine RNA-Splicing Modulators for the Treatment of Huntington's Disease.

Journal of medicinal chemistry·2026
Same author

Correction to "ROSHAMBO2: Accelerating Molecular Alignment for Large Chemical Libraries with GPU Optimization and Algorithmic Advances".

Journal of chemical information and modeling·2026
Same author

ROSHAMBO2: Accelerating Molecular Alignment for Large Chemical Libraries with GPU Optimization and Algorithmic Advances.

Journal of chemical information and modeling·2025

Related Experiment Video

Updated: Jul 2, 2025

Author Spotlight: A Computational Approach to Decipher Amino Acid Preferences in Multispecific Protein-Protein Interactions
06:50

Author Spotlight: A Computational Approach to Decipher Amino Acid Preferences in Multispecific Protein-Protein Interactions

Published on: January 26, 2024

1.8K

Machine Learning Methods as a Cost-Effective Alternative to Physics-Based Binding Free Energy Calculations.

Nupur Bansal1, Ye Wang1, Simone Sciabola1

  • 1Biotherapeutic and Medicinal Sciences, Biogen, 225 Binney Street, Cambridge, MA 02142, USA.

Molecules (Basel, Switzerland)
|February 24, 2024
PubMed
Summary

Comparing physics-based and machine learning methods for drug discovery, this study found physics-based approaches excel with solvation changes, while machine learning offers a cost-effective alternative dependent on training data quality for binding free energy predictions.

Keywords:
benchmarkingfree energyligandsreceptorsscreening assays

More Related Videos

Author Spotlight: Advancing Cell Membrane Biophysics - Exploring Interactions and Challenges Through Experimental and Computational Approaches
07:31

Author Spotlight: Advancing Cell Membrane Biophysics - Exploring Interactions and Challenges Through Experimental and Computational Approaches

Published on: September 1, 2023

2.2K
Interactive Molecular Model Assembly with 3D Printing
06:15

Interactive Molecular Model Assembly with 3D Printing

Published on: August 13, 2020

10.0K

Related Experiment Videos

Last Updated: Jul 2, 2025

Author Spotlight: A Computational Approach to Decipher Amino Acid Preferences in Multispecific Protein-Protein Interactions
06:50

Author Spotlight: A Computational Approach to Decipher Amino Acid Preferences in Multispecific Protein-Protein Interactions

Published on: January 26, 2024

1.8K
Author Spotlight: Advancing Cell Membrane Biophysics - Exploring Interactions and Challenges Through Experimental and Computational Approaches
07:31

Author Spotlight: Advancing Cell Membrane Biophysics - Exploring Interactions and Challenges Through Experimental and Computational Approaches

Published on: September 1, 2023

2.2K
Interactive Molecular Model Assembly with 3D Printing
06:15

Interactive Molecular Model Assembly with 3D Printing

Published on: August 13, 2020

10.0K

Area of Science:

  • Computational chemistry
  • Drug discovery
  • Machine learning in pharmacology

Background:

  • Accurate prediction of protein-ligand binding affinity is crucial for drug discovery.
  • Physics-based methods face challenges with forcefield accuracy and conformational sampling.
  • Machine learning (ML) methods are emerging as powerful tools for binding affinity prediction.

Purpose of the Study:

  • To retrospectively evaluate and compare the performance of state-of-the-art physics-based and machine learning methods for binding free energy calculations.
  • To assess the strengths and limitations of different computational approaches across diverse protein targets and ligand series.

Main Methods:

  • Retrospective binding free energy evaluations were performed on 172 compounds across four protein targets and five congeneric ligand series.
  • Comparison included various physics-based methods with differing complexity and sampling, alongside available state-of-the-art machine learning models.
  • Performance was assessed based on the accuracy of rank ordering ligands and predicting binding affinities.

Main Results:

  • Physics-based methods demonstrated strong performance when ligand perturbations involved the solvation region.
  • Physics-based methods showed limitations in accurately capturing large conformational changes within protein active sites.
  • Machine learning-based methods provided a cost-effective alternative, but their predictive accuracy was contingent on the quality and quantity of available training data.

Conclusions:

  • Both physics-based and machine learning methods have distinct advantages and limitations in predicting protein-ligand binding free energies.
  • The choice of method should consider the specific characteristics of the system, such as the nature of ligand perturbations and conformational flexibility.
  • Machine learning models show promise as efficient tools, emphasizing the need for robust experimental datasets for reliable model training and application in drug discovery.