Skip to content

Commit

Permalink
Merge pull request #66 from OpenFreeEnergy/docs_cleanup
Browse files Browse the repository at this point in the history
Minor Docs clean up
  • Loading branch information
jthorton authored Nov 20, 2024
2 parents cd226b6 + 013e8f6 commit c2855ed
Show file tree
Hide file tree
Showing 6 changed files with 35 additions and 26 deletions.
10 changes: 6 additions & 4 deletions docs/guide/application_free_energies_system_representations.rst
Original file line number Diff line number Diff line change
Expand Up @@ -3,14 +3,14 @@ Application in Free Energy Calculations
=======================================

In recent literature, many ways have shown how a system can be represented
during a free energy calculation. Here is a small Taxonomy that tries to
capture them and show benefits and disadvantages (more you can find in
during a free energy calculation. Here is a small taxonomy that tries to
capture them and show benefits and disadvantages (more information can be found in
[1]_ [2]_):

.. image:: ../_static/img/Topology_types.png

The hybrid topology approach and the single topology approach depend heavily
on atom mappings, The mappings are used to find the shared core region of the
The hybrid and single topology approaches depend heavily
on atom mappings. The mappings are used to find the shared core region of the
molecules, such that the atoms part of this region can be represented as one.
The single topology approach tries to maximize the number of mapped
atoms, where the hybrid topology approach only maps one shared region of
Expand All @@ -20,6 +20,8 @@ each other.
The usage of Kartograf's atom mapper for this application can be found in the
turorial: :doc:`/tutorial/mapping_tutorial`.

References
~~~~~~~~~~

.. [1] Ries, B.; Rieder, S.; Rhiner, C.; Hünenberger, P. H.; Riniker, S. - RestraintMaker: a graph-based approach to select distance restraints in free-energy calculations with dual topology. J Comput Aided Mol Des 36, 175–192 (2022). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10822-022-00445-6.
.. [2] Ries, B.; Alibay, I.; Swenson, D. W. H; Baumann, H. M.; Henry, M. M.; Eastwood, J. R. B.; Gowers, R. J. - Kartograf: An Accurate Geometry-Based Atom Mapper for Hybrid Topology Relative Free Energy Calculations, Chemrxiv (2023) https://10.26434/chemrxiv-2023-0n1pq
Expand Down
10 changes: 5 additions & 5 deletions docs/guide/atom_mapping.rst
Original file line number Diff line number Diff line change
Expand Up @@ -2,9 +2,8 @@
Atom Mapping
===============================

Atom mappings can have a large variety of different use cases. The general
the goal of atom mapping is to find an assignment between two sets of atoms
based on a certain motivation. A very common approach is to find an
Atom mappings can have a large variety of different use cases. The general goal of atom mapping is to find an
assignment between two sets of atoms based on a certain motivation. A very common approach is to find an
assignment of atoms, between two molecules, which are considered similar/equal
leading to an MCS estimation.

Expand Down Expand Up @@ -32,10 +31,11 @@ Approach:
Atom Mapping Filters
---------------------

Additionally, can rules be applied during Kartograf's mapping algorithm,
Additionally, rules can be applied during Kartograf's mapping algorithm,
such that for example hydrogens are only mapped on hydrogens or no ring
breakage occurs. Such rules might be necessary in order to
ensure sampling of physically relevant configurations or serve other purposes.
ensure sampling of physically relevant configurations or serve other purposes. You can find more information and
examples in the :ref:`mapping filters tutorial <custom-filter-label>`.



8 changes: 4 additions & 4 deletions docs/guide/atom_mapping_scoring.rst
Original file line number Diff line number Diff line change
Expand Up @@ -11,7 +11,7 @@ distance of 0 angstroms to each other.

A less trivial example is the atom mapping case for molecule transformations
like in hybrid topology free energy calculation approaches. In such a case
the atom quality depends on the likelihood of the transformation to converge
the mapping quality depends on the likelihood of the transformation to converge
well and to give a reasonable free energy. This in a way would
require the true and calculated result of the calculation and lead to a henn
egg problem. To tackle this problem usually simplistic approaches
Expand All @@ -25,10 +25,10 @@ those ligands.

Additionally one can start adding parameter-specific scores, that depend on
force fields or other method-related aspects. However this might
theoretically improve the method outcome, it could minders the
theoretically improve the method outcome, it could hinder the
transferability of the scorer from one method to another (overfitting).

In Katograf we added some functionality, that can be used as an aspect of an
atom mapping scorer, like the Mapping RSMD Scorer, checking the displacement
of atoms by the scorers or the Volume Ratio Scorer, checking the volume overlap
atom mapping scorer, like the :class:`.MappingRMSDScorer`, checking the displacement
of atoms by the scorers or the :class:`.MappingVolumeRatioScorer`, checking the volume overlap
of the two molecules.
23 changes: 15 additions & 8 deletions docs/tutorial/custom_filters.rst
Original file line number Diff line number Diff line change
@@ -1,14 +1,17 @@
.. _custom-filter-label:

Customize Atom Mapping Filter Rules
-----------------------------------
.. _custom-filter-label:

Sometimes the default rule-based filters of Kartograf's atom mapper,
which don't map ring size changes, ring breaks, or flexibility changes in
rings, might not be enough for you. For example, you might want to
additionally avoid element changes in your mapping. Then you can customize
the filter rules and employ your own rules. The general signature of the
Filters uses a molecule `molA` and a molecule `molB`, that were provided to generate a `mapping` linking individual atoms from `molA` to `molB`. In the function, the `mapping` is filtered by the implemented rule resulting in a returned 'filtered_mappig`::
which don't map ``ring size changes``, ``ring breaks``, or ``flexibility changes in rings``, might not be enough for you.
For example, you might want to additionally avoid element changes in your mapping. Then you can customize
the filter rules and employ your own rules. The general signature of the filters uses two molecules ``molA`` and
``molB``, that were provided to generate a ``mapping`` linking individual atoms from ``molA`` to ``molB``.
In the function, the ``mapping`` should then be filtered by the implemented rule resulting in a returned
``filtered_mapping``:

.. code-block::
def custom_filter(
molA: Chem.Mol, molB: Chem.Mol, mapping: dict[int, int]
Expand All @@ -22,7 +25,9 @@ Filters uses a molecule `molA` and a molecule `molB`, that were provided to gene
This signature allows you to build your own filter, with any feature you
like, for example, the following definition defines the filter for the element
changes, by filtering for the atomic number of the RDKit molecules and
comparing them. The return value of a filter is the filtered dictionary::
comparing them. The return value of a filter is the filtered dictionary:

.. code-block::
def filter_element_changes(
molA: Chem.Mol, molB: Chem.Mol, mapping: dict[int, int]
Expand All @@ -41,7 +46,9 @@ comparing them. The return value of a filter is the filtered dictionary::
return filtered_mapping
After defining this filter, you only need to plug it into the atom mapper
like this::
like this:

.. code-block::
from kartograf import KartografAtomMapper
# Build Kartograf Atom Mapper
Expand Down
2 changes: 1 addition & 1 deletion docs/tutorial/fused_rings.rst
Original file line number Diff line number Diff line change
Expand Up @@ -27,7 +27,7 @@ for this special case. First, lets start by creating our example molecules and a
The first type of mapping keeps the common rings fixed and grows the second fused ring using dummy atoms.
This approach would involve transforming fewer atoms but can lead to systematic errors in the calculated free energies [1]_.
This is the default behaviour of the ``KartografAtomMapper``:
This is the default behaviour of the :class:`.KartografAtomMapper`:

.. code-block::
Expand Down
8 changes: 4 additions & 4 deletions docs/tutorial/mapping_tutorial.rst
Original file line number Diff line number Diff line change
Expand Up @@ -52,13 +52,13 @@ visualization of the mapping:

Note that Kartograf does first solve the geometry problem, by finding atoms
close to each other for the mapping. Next, it will apply a set of default
rules, that will remove mappings, that cause a so-called `ring-break`, a
`ring-size change`, and a `ring-flexibility change`. This default behavior can
be turned off and/or customized to personal needs (see:ref:`custom-filter-label`).
rules, that will remove mappings, that cause a so-called ``ring-break``, a
``ring-size change``, and a ``ring-flexibility change``. This default behavior can
be turned off and/or customized to personal needs see :ref:`the filtering tutorial <custom-filter-label>`.

Additionally, we could assess the quality of our mapping, there are several
metrics in Kartograf that can be used to investigate the mapping. Here we are
going to use the MappingRMSDScorer, which gives insight into how far the atoms
going to use the :class:`.MappingRMSDScorer`, which gives insight into how far the atoms
need to travel from one state to the other, if they are mapped onto each
other::

Expand Down

0 comments on commit c2855ed

Please sign in to comment.