4. Knuth, Donald, E. The art of computer programming. Vol. 1-3. 2nd edition. Addison-Wesley, September 1998.
5. Press, William H.; Teukolsky, Saul A.; Vetterling, William T.; Flannery, Brian, P. Numerical recipies in C: the art of scientific computing. 2nd edition. Cambridge University Press, 1992.
6. Orwant, John; MacDonald, John; Hietaniemi, Jarkko. Mastering algorithms with Perl. O'Reilly Media Inc., August 1999.
24. Weininger, David. SMILES, a chemical language and information system. 1. Introduction to methodology and encoding rules. J. Am. Chem. Soc. 1988, 28, 31-36.
25. Weininger, David; Weininger, Arthur; Weininger, Joseph L. SMILES. 2. Algorithm for generation of unique SMILES notation. J. Am. Chem. Soc. 1989, 29, 97-101.
26. Weininger, David. SMILES. 3. Depit. Graphical depiction of chemical structures. J. Am. Chem. Soc. 1990, 30, 237-243.
28. Parkin, Gerard. Valence, oxidation number, and formal charge: Three related but fundamentally different concepts. J. Chem. Educ. 2006, 83, 791-799.
29. Gateiger, Johann; Jochum, Clemens. An algorithm for the perception of synthetically important rigngs. J. Chem. Inf. Comput. Sci. 1979, 19, 43-47.
30. Balducci, Renzo; Pearlman, Robert, S. Efficient exact solution of the ring perception problem. J. Chem. Inf. Comput. Sci. 1994, 34, 822-831.
31. Hanser, Thierry; Jauffret, Philippe; Kaufmann, G. A new algorithm for exhaustive ring perception in a molecular graph. J. Chem. Inf. Comput. Sci. 1996, 36, 1146-1152.
32. Cahn, R. S.; Ingold, Christopher; Prelog, Vladimir. Specification of molecular chirality. Angew. Chem. Internat. Edit. 1966, 5, 385-415.
33. Prelog, Vladimir; Helmchen, Gunter. Basic principles of the CIP-system and proposals for revision. Angew. Chem. Internat. Edit. 1982, 21, 567-583.
34. Mata, Paulina; Lobo, Ann M.; Marshall, Chris; Johnson, Peter A. The CIP seqeunce rules: Analysis and proposal for a revision. Tetrahedron. 1993, 4, 657-668.
35. Nourse, James G.; Carhart, Raymond E.; Smith, Dennis H.; Djerassi, Carl. Exhaustive generation of stereoisomers for structure elucidation. J. Am. Chem. Soc. 1979, 101, 1216-1223.
36. Nourse, James G.; Smith, Dennis H.; Carhart, Raymond E.; Djerassi, Carl. Computer-assisted elucidation of molecular structue with stereochemistry. J. Am. Chem. Soc. 1980, 102, 6289-6295.
39. Ralaivola, L.; Swamidass, S. J.; Saigo, H.; Baldi, P. Graph kernals for chemical informatics. Neural Networks. 2005, 18, 1093-1110.
40. Willett. P.; John M. Barnard, J. M.; Downs, G. M. Chemical Similarity Searching. J. Chem. Inf. Comput. Sci. 1998, 38, 983-996.
41. Holliday, J.D.; Hu, C-Y.; Willett, P. Grouping of coefficients for the calculation of inter-molecular similarity and dissimilarity using 2D fragment bit-strings, Combinatorial Chemistry & High Throughput Screening. 2002, Vol. 5, No. 2, 155-166.
42. Flinger, M.; Verducci, J.; Blower, P. A modification of the Jacard-Tanimoto similarity index for diverse selection of chemical compounds using binary strings. Technometrics. 2002, 44, 110-119.
43. Wang, Y.; Bajorath, J. Balancing the influence of molecular complexity in fingerprint similarity searching. J. Chem. Inf. Comput. Sci. 2008, 48, 75-84.
44. Flower, D. R. On the properties of bit string-based measures of chemical similarity. J. Chem. Inf. Comput. Sci. 1998, 38, 379-386.
46. Joseph L. Durant; Burton A. Leland; Douglas R. Henry; James G. Nourse. Reoptimization of MDL Keys for Use in Drug Discovery. J. Chem. Inf. Comput. Sci. 2002, 42, 1273-1280.
48. Morgan, H.L. The generation of a unique machine description for chemical structures - A technique developed at chemical abstracts service. J. Chem. Doc. 1965, 5, 107-112.
49. Penny, R.H. A connectivity code for use in describing chemical structures. J. Chem. Doc. 1965, 5, 113-117. J. Chem. Doc. 1973, 3, 153-157.
50. Adamson, G. W.; Cowell, J.; Lynch, M. F.; McLure, A. H.; Town, W.G. Yapp, M. Strategic considerations in design of a screening system for substructure searches of chemical structure files.
51. W. T. Wipke, W.T.; Krishnan S.; Ouchi, G. I. Hash functions for rapid storage and retrieval of chemical structures. J. Chem. Inf. Comput. Sci. 2002, 42, 1273-1280. 1978, 18, 31- .
52. a). Rogers, D.; Brown, R.D. Using extended-connectivity fingerprints with laplacian-modified bayesian analysis in high-throughput screening follow-Up. J. Biomol. Screening. 2005, 10, 682-686. b). Rogers, D.; Hahn, M. Extended-connectivity fingerprints. J. Chem. Inf. Mod. 2010, 50, 742-754.
53. Faulon, J.-L.; Visco, D. P., Jr.; Pophale, R. S. The Signature Molecular Descriptor. 1. Using extended valence sequences in QSAR and QSPR studies. J. Chem. Inf. Comput. Sci. 2003, 43, 707-720.
54. Faulon, J.-L.; Collins, M. J.; Carr, R. D. The signature molecular descriptor. 4. Canonizing molecules using extended valence sequences. J. Chem. Inf. Comput. Sci. 2004, 44, 427-436.
55. Bender, A.; Mussa, H. Y.; Glen, R. C.; Reiling, S. Molecular similarity searching using atom environments, information-based feature selection, and a naive bayesian classifier. J. Chem. Inf. Comput. Sci. 2004, 44, 170-178.
56. Bender, A.; Mussa, H. Y.; Glen, R. C.; Reiling, S. Similarity searching of chemical databases using atom environment descriptors (MOLPRINT 2D): Evaluation of performance. J. Chem. Inf. Comput. Sci. 2004, 44, 1708-1718.
57. Carhart, R. E.; Smith, D. H.; Venkataraghavan, R. Atom pairs as molecular features in structure-activity studies: Definition and application. J. Chem. Inf. Comput. Sci. 1985, 25, 64-73.
58. Nilakantan, R.; Bauman, N.; Dixon, J. S.; Venkataraghavan, R. Topological torsion: A new molecular descriptor for SAR applications. Comparison with other descriptors. J. Chem. Inf. Comput. Sci. 1987, 27, 82-85.
59. Langham, J. L.; Jain, A. N. Accurate and interpretable computational modeling of chemical mutagenicity. J. Chem. Inf. Comput. Sci. 2008, 48, 1833-1839.
60. Schneider, G.; Neidhart, W.; Giller, T.; Schmid, G. Scaffold-hopping by topological pharmacophore search: A contribution to virtual screening. Angew. Chem. Int. Ed. 1999, 38, 2894-2896.
61. Fechner, U.; Franke, L.; Renner, S.; Schneider, P. Schneider, G. Comparison of correlation vector methods for ligand-based similarity searching. J. Comput. Aided Mol. Des. 2003, 17, 687-698.
62. Fechner, U.; Schneider, G. Evaluation of distance metrics for ligand-based similarity searching. ChemBioChem. 2004, 5, 538-540.
63. Willet, P.; Barnard, J. M.; Downs, G. M. Chemical similarity searching. J. Chem. Inf. Comput. Sci. 1998, 38, 983-996.
64. Chen, X.; Reynolds, C. H.; Performance of similarity measures in 2D fragment-based similarity searching: Comparison of structural descriptors and similarity coefficients. J. Chem. Inf. Comput. Sci. 2002, 42, 1407-1414.
65. Steffen, R.; Fechner, U.; Schneider, G. Alignment-free pharmacophore patterns: A correlation-vector approach. Pharmacophores and pharmacophore searches. 2006. Volume 32. Wiley-VCH. 49-80.
66. McGregor, M. J.; Muskal, S. M. Pharmacophore fingerprinting. 1. Application to QSAR and focused library design. J. Chem. Inf. Comput. Sci. 1999, 39, 569-574.
67. Floyd, R. W. Algorithm 97: Shortest path. Communications of the ACM. 1962, 5(6): 345.
68. Horvath, D. Topological pharmacophores. Cheminformatics approaches to virtual screening. 2008. RSC Publishing. 44-75.
69. Ewing, T.; Baber, C.; Feher, M. Novel 2D fingerprints in ligand-based virtual screening. J. Chem. Inf. Model. 2006, 46, 2423-2431.
70. Watson, P. Naive Bayes classification using 2D pharmacophore feature triplet vectors. J. Chem. Inf. Model. 2008, 48, 166-178
72. Kearsley, S. K.; Sallamack, S.; Fluder, E. M.; Andose, J. D.; Mosley, R. T.; Sheridan, R. P. Chemical Similarity Using Physiochemical Property Descriptors.J. Chem. Inf. Comput. Sci., 1996, 36, 118-127.
73. Filimonov, D.; Poroikov, V.; Borodina, Y.; Gloriozova, T. Chemical similarity assessment through multilevel neighborhoods of atoms: Definition and comparison with the other Descriptors. J. Chem. Inf. Comput. Sci., 1999, 39, 666-670.
75. Kier, L. B.; Hall, L. H. Electrotopological state indices for atom types: A novel combination of electronic, topological, and valence state information. J. Chem. Inf. Comput. Sci. 1995, 35, 1039-1045.
76. Kier, L. B.; Hall, L. H. Molecular structure description - The electrotopological state. Academic Press, 1999.
78. Kier, L. B.; Hall, L. H. The E-State as the basis for molecular structure space definition and structure similarity. J. Chem. Inf. Comput. Sci. 2000, 40, 784-791.
80. Clark, M.; Cramer III, R. D.; Opdenbosch, N.V. Validation of the general purpose Tripos 5.2 forcefield. J. Comput. Chem. 1989, 10, 982-1012.
81. Rappe, A. K.; Casewit, C. J.; Colwell, K. S.; Goddard III, W. A.; Skiff, W. M. UFF, a full periodic table force field for molecular mechanics and molecular dynamics simulations. J. Am. Chem. Soc. 1992, 114, 10024-10035.
82. Rappe, A. K. Personal communication. 2009.
83. Halgren, T. A.; Merck Molecular Force Field. I. Basis, Form, Scope, Parameterization, and Performance of MMFF94. 1996, J. Comput. Chem., 17, 490-519.
84. Halgren, T.A.; Merck molecular force field. II. MMFF94 van der Waals and electrostatic parameters for intermolecular interactions. J. Compt. Chem. 1996, 17, 520-552.
85. Halgren, T.A.; Merck molecular force field. III. Molecular geometries and vibrational frequencies for MMFF94. J. Compt. Chem. 1996, 17, 553-586.
86. Halgren, T.A.; Nachbar, R. B.; Merck molecular force field. IV. conformational energies and geometries for MMFF94. J. Compt. Chem. 1996, 17, 587-615.
87. Halgren, T.A.; Merck molecular force field. V. Extension of MMFF94 using experimental data, additional computational data, and empirical rules. J. Compt. Chem. 1996, 17, 616-641.
88. Mayo, S. L.; Olafson, B. A.; Goddard III, W. A. DREIDING: A Generic Force Field for Molecular Simulations. J. Phys. Chem. 1990, 94, 8897-8909.
89. Wildman, S. A.; Crippen, G. M.; Prediction of Physicochemical Parameters by Atomic Contributions. J. Chem. Inf. Comput. Sci. 1999, 39, 868-873.
90. Ertl, P.; Rohde, B.; Selzer, P. Fast calculation of molecular polar surface area as a sum of fragment-based contributions and its application to the prediction of drug transport Properties. J. Med. Chem. 2000, 43, 3714-3717.
91. Ertl, P. Personal communication. 2010.
92. Veber, D. F.; Johnson, S. R.; Chend, H. Y.; Smith, B. R.; Ward, K. W.; Kopple, K. D. Molecular properties that influence the oral bioavailability of drug candidates. J. Med. Chem. 2002, 45, 2165-2623.
91. Lipinski, C. A.; Lombardo, F.; Dominy, B. W.; Feeney, P. J. Experimental and computational approaches to estimate solubility and permeability in drug discovery and development settings. Adv. Drug. Del. Rev. 1997, 23, 3-25.
92. Congreve M.; Carr R., Murray C., Jhoti H. A 'rule of three' for fragment-based lead discovery? Drug. Discov. Today. 2003, 8, 876-877.
93. Zhao, Y. H.; Abraham, M. H.; Zissimos, A. M. Fast calculation of van der Waals volume as a sum of atomic and bond contributions and its application to drug compounds. J. Org. Chem. 2003, 68, 7368-7373.