A New Multi-Objective Approach for Molecular Docking Based on RMSD and Binding Energy

Ligand-protein docking is an optimization problem based on predicting the position of a ligand with the lowest binding energy in the active site of the receptor. Molecular docking problems are traditionally tackled with single-objective, as well as with multi-objective approaches, to minimize the binding energy. In this paper, we propose a novel multi-objective formulation that considers: the Root Mean Square Deviation (RMSD) difference in the coordinates of ligands and the binding (intermolecular) energy, as two objectives to evaluate the quality of the ligand-protein interactions. To determine the kind of Pareto front approximations that can be obtained, we have selected a set of representative multi-objective algorithms such as NSGA-II, SMPSO, GDE3, and MOEA/D. Their performances have been assessed by applying two main quality indicators intended to measure convergence and diversity of the fronts. In addition, a comparison with LGA, a reference single-objective evolutionary algorithm for molecular docking (AutoDock) is carried out. In general, SMPSO shows the best overall results in terms of energy and RMSD (value lower than 2A for successful docking results). This new multi-objective approach shows an improvement over the ligand-protein docking predictions that could be promising in in silico docking studies to select new anticancer compounds for therapeutic targets that are multidrug resistant.

Dynamic Multi-Objective Optimization With jMetal and Spark: a Case Study

Technologies for Big Data and Data Science are receiving increasing research interest nowadays. This paper introduces the prototyping architecture of a tool aimed to solve Big Data Optimization problems. Our tool combines the jMetal framework for multi-objective optimization with Apache Spark, a technology that is gaining momentum. In particular, we make use of the streaming facilities of Spark to feed an optimization problem with data from different sources. We demonstrate the use of our tool by solving a dynamic bi-objective instance of the Traveling Salesman Problem (TSP) based on near real-time traffic data from New York City, which is updated several times per minute. Our experiment shows that both jMetal and Spark can be integrated providing a software platform to deal with dynamic multi-optimization problems.

Robustness in facility location

Facility location concerns the placement of facilities, for various objectives, by use of mathematical models and solution procedures. Almost all facility location models that can be found in literature are based on minimizing costs or maximizing cover, to cover as much demand as possible. These models are quite efficient for finding an optimal location for a new facility for a particular data set, which is considered to be constant and known in advance. In a real world situation, input data like demand and travelling costs are not fixed, nor known in advance. This uncertainty and uncontrollability can lead to unacceptable losses or even bankruptcy. A way of dealing with these factors is robustness modelling. A robust facility location model aims to locate a facility that stays within predefined limits for all expectable circumstances as good as possible. The deviation robustness concept is used as basis to develop a new competitive deviation robustness model. The competition is modelled with a Huff based model, which calculates the market share of the new facility. Robustness in this model is defined as the ability of a facility location to capture a minimum market share, despite variations in demand. A test case is developed by which algorithms can be tested on their ability to solve robust facility location models. Four stochastic optimization algorithms are considered from which Simulated Annealing turned out to be the most appropriate. The test case is slightly modified for a competitive market situation. With the Simulated Annealing algorithm, the developed competitive deviation model is solved, for three considered norms of deviation. At the end, also a grid search is performed to illustrate the landscape of the objective function of the competitive deviation model. The model appears to be multimodal and seems to be challenging for further research.

Phylogenetic inference's algorithms

Phylogenetic inference consist in the search of an evolutionary tree to explain the best way possible genealogical relationships of a set of species. Phylogenetic analysis has a large number of applications in areas such as biology, ecology, paleontology, etc. There are several criterias which has been defined in order to infer phylogenies, among which are the maximum parsimony and maximum likelihood. The first one tries to find the phylogenetic tree that minimizes the number of evolutionary steps needed to describe the evolutionary history among species, while the second tries to find the tree that has the highest probability of produce the observed data according to an evolutionary model. The search of a phylogenetic tree can be formulated as a multi-objective optimization problem, which aims to find trees which satisfy simultaneously (and as much as possible) both criteria of parsimony and likelihood. Due to the fact that these criteria are different there won't be a single optimal solution (a single tree), but a set of compromise solutions. The solutions of this set are called "Pareto Optimal". To find this solutions, evolutionary algorithms are being used with success nowadays.This algorithms are a family of techniques, which aren’t exact, inspired by the process of natural selection. They usually find great quality solutions in order to resolve convoluted optimization problems. The way this algorithms works is based on the handling of a set of trial solutions (trees in the phylogeny case) using operators, some of them exchanges information between solutions, simulating DNA crossing, and others apply aleatory modifications, simulating a mutation. The result of this algorithms is an approximation to the set of the “Pareto Optimal” which can be shown in a graph with in order that the expert in the problem (the biologist when we talk about inference) can choose the solution of the commitment which produces the higher interest. In the case of optimization multi-objective applied to phylogenetic inference, there is open source software tool, called MO-Phylogenetics, which is designed for the purpose of resolving inference problems with classic evolutionary algorithms and last generation algorithms. REFERENCES [1] C.A. Coello Coello, G.B. Lamont, D.A. van Veldhuizen. Evolutionary algorithms for solving multi-objective problems. Spring. Agosto 2007 [2] C. Zambrano-Vega, A.J. Nebro, J.F Aldana-Montes. MO-Phylogenetics: a phylogenetic inference software tool with multi-objective evolutionary metaheuristics. Methods in Ecology and Evolution. En prensa. Febrero 2016.

Efficient Hill Climber for Constrained Pseudo-Boolean Optimization Problems

Efficient hill climbers have been recently proposed for single- and multi-objective pseudo-Boolean optimization problems. For $k$-bounded pseudo-Boolean functions where each variable appears in at most a constant number of subfunctions, it has been theoretically proven that the neighborhood of a solution can be explored in constant time. These hill climbers, combined with a high-level exploration strategy, have shown to improve state of the art methods in experimental studies and open the door to the so-called Gray Box Optimization, where part, but not all, of the details of the objective functions are used to better explore the search space. One important limitation of all the previous proposals is that they can only be applied to unconstrained pseudo-Boolean optimization problems. In this work, we address the constrained case for multi-objective $k$-bounded pseudo-Boolean optimization problems. We find that adding constraints to the pseudo-Boolean problem has a linear computational cost in the hill climber.