Count your bits: fingerprint benchmarking to assess broad chemical space representation

IF 7.9 2区 化学 Q1 CHEMISTRY, MULTIDISCIPLINARY
Florian Huber, Julian Pollmann
{"title":"Count your bits: fingerprint benchmarking to assess broad chemical space representation","authors":"Florian Huber,&nbsp;Julian Pollmann","doi":"10.1186/s13321-026-01245-y","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><p>Quantifying molecular similarity is a cornerstone of cheminformatics, underpinning applications from virtual screening and nearest-neighbor search to chemical space visualization and the evaluation of machine-learning predictions. Yet, despite widespread use of Tanimoto comparisons of 2D fingerprints, the practical behavior of these similarity measures depends strongly on the fingerprint type, representation (binary vs. count), and whether fingerprints are folded into fixed-length vectors. In this work, our main goal is to provide a broad and systematic comparison of common fingerprint types, including dictionary-based, circular (Morgan/FCFP), path-based (RDKit), topological-distance-based (Atom Pair), hybrid distance-encoded (MAP4), torsion, LINGO, and Avalon, together with several representation variants. We benchmark these fingerprints across multiple large and heterogeneous datasets using complementary evaluation tasks that probe specificity, score distributions, compound-size dependence, top-k ranking agreement, and compare fingerprint similarities to a graph-based reference. Across benchmarks, count and often log-count variants generally improve specificity and structural alignment, while folding-induced bit collisions can strongly distort similarities for high-occupancy fingerprints, making unfolded variants particularly important for RDKit and often necessary for MAP4 on heterogeneous datasets. To support reproducible benchmarking and future extensions, we also introduce the open-source Python library chemap, which provides unified computation of folded, unfolded, and frequency-folded fingerprints together with optimized similarity calculations.</p><p><b>Scientific contribution</b></p><p>We introduce a multi-criteria benchmarking framework for molecular fingerprints that goes beyond classical virtual-screening retrieval tests by evaluating specificity (fingerprint duplicates), score behavior (including compound-size dependence), ranking agreement, and neighborhood structure on large, heterogeneous small-molecule datasets. Our results reveal that common default settings, especially folding for high-occupancy fingerprints, can introduce severe bit-collision artifacts, and that count (often log-count) and unfolded variants substantially improve specificity and agreement with structure-based references. We release the open-source Python library chemap to standardize these fingerprint variants and enable reproducible, extensible benchmarking for future fingerprint development.</p></div>","PeriodicalId":617,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Cheminformatics","volume":"18 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":7.9000,"publicationDate":"2026-06-30","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://link.springer.com/content/pdf/10.1186/s13321-026-01245-y.pdf","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Cheminformatics","FirstCategoryId":"92","ListUrlMain":"https://link.springer.com/article/10.1186/s13321-026-01245-y","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"化学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"CHEMISTRY, MULTIDISCIPLINARY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Quantifying molecular similarity is a cornerstone of cheminformatics, underpinning applications from virtual screening and nearest-neighbor search to chemical space visualization and the evaluation of machine-learning predictions. Yet, despite widespread use of Tanimoto comparisons of 2D fingerprints, the practical behavior of these similarity measures depends strongly on the fingerprint type, representation (binary vs. count), and whether fingerprints are folded into fixed-length vectors. In this work, our main goal is to provide a broad and systematic comparison of common fingerprint types, including dictionary-based, circular (Morgan/FCFP), path-based (RDKit), topological-distance-based (Atom Pair), hybrid distance-encoded (MAP4), torsion, LINGO, and Avalon, together with several representation variants. We benchmark these fingerprints across multiple large and heterogeneous datasets using complementary evaluation tasks that probe specificity, score distributions, compound-size dependence, top-k ranking agreement, and compare fingerprint similarities to a graph-based reference. Across benchmarks, count and often log-count variants generally improve specificity and structural alignment, while folding-induced bit collisions can strongly distort similarities for high-occupancy fingerprints, making unfolded variants particularly important for RDKit and often necessary for MAP4 on heterogeneous datasets. To support reproducible benchmarking and future extensions, we also introduce the open-source Python library chemap, which provides unified computation of folded, unfolded, and frequency-folded fingerprints together with optimized similarity calculations.

Scientific contribution

We introduce a multi-criteria benchmarking framework for molecular fingerprints that goes beyond classical virtual-screening retrieval tests by evaluating specificity (fingerprint duplicates), score behavior (including compound-size dependence), ranking agreement, and neighborhood structure on large, heterogeneous small-molecule datasets. Our results reveal that common default settings, especially folding for high-occupancy fingerprints, can introduce severe bit-collision artifacts, and that count (often log-count) and unfolded variants substantially improve specificity and agreement with structure-based references. We release the open-source Python library chemap to standardize these fingerprint variants and enable reproducible, extensible benchmarking for future fingerprint development.

数数你的比特:指纹基准测试,以评估广泛的化学空间代表性。
分子相似性的量化是化学信息学的基石,是虚拟筛选、最近邻搜索、化学空间可视化和机器学习预测评估等应用的基础。然而,尽管广泛使用二维指纹的谷本比较,但这些相似性度量的实际行为在很大程度上取决于指纹类型、表示(二进制还是计数)以及指纹是否折叠成固定长度的向量。在这项工作中,我们的主要目标是对常见的指纹类型进行广泛而系统的比较,包括基于字典的、圆形的(Morgan/FCFP)、基于路径的(RDKit)、基于拓扑距离的(Atom Pair)、混合距离编码的(MAP4)、扭曲、LINGO和Avalon,以及几种表示变体。我们在多个大型异构数据集上对这些指纹进行基准测试,使用互补的评估任务来探测特异性、分数分布、化合物大小依赖性、top-k排名一致性,并将指纹的相似性与基于图的参考进行比较。在基准测试中,计数和日志计数变体通常可以提高特异性和结构一致性,而折叠引起的位碰撞会严重扭曲高占用率指纹的相似性,这使得未折叠的变体对RDKit特别重要,对于异构数据集的MAP4来说通常是必要的。为了支持可重复的基准测试和未来的扩展,我们还引入了开源Python库chemap,它提供折叠、展开和频率折叠指纹的统一计算以及优化的相似度计算。我们引入了一个多标准的分子指纹基准框架,超越了传统的虚拟筛选检索测试,通过评估特异性(指纹重复)、评分行为(包括化合物大小依赖性)、排名一致性和大型异构小分子数据集的邻域结构。我们的研究结果表明,常见的默认设置,特别是对于高占用率的折叠指纹,可能会引入严重的位碰撞伪像,计数(通常是日志计数)和未展开的变体大大提高了特异性和基于结构的参考的一致性。我们发布了开源Python库chemap来标准化这些指纹变体,并为未来的指纹开发提供可重复、可扩展的基准测试。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
Journal of Cheminformatics
Journal of Cheminformatics CHEMISTRY, MULTIDISCIPLINARY-COMPUTER SCIENCE, INFORMATION SYSTEMS
CiteScore
14.10
自引率
7.00%
发文量
82
审稿时长
3 months
期刊介绍: Journal of Cheminformatics is an open access journal publishing original peer-reviewed research in all aspects of cheminformatics and molecular modelling. Coverage includes, but is not limited to: chemical information systems, software and databases, and molecular modelling, chemical structure representations and their use in structure, substructure, and similarity searching of chemical substance and chemical reaction databases, computer and molecular graphics, computer-aided molecular design, expert systems, QSAR, and data mining techniques.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:604180095
Book学术官方微信
小红书