MOA.RESEARCH SUITE
BioJungboMoa바이오·비임상StructureMoa분자 구조·SARKRMediMoa한의약·연구 근거
StructureMoaOncology · CNS · cardio-metabolic · ADC catalog
FamiliesCompareAnalyzeMethodology

Lab: what the scores answer

Experimental tools for choosing which catalog records to inspect first.

Lab · catalog exploration tool

Scores are sorting rules based on catalog roles, structure records and graph connections. They are not trained or externally validated predictions of potency or development success. Well-populated families and designated centres can receive higher scores.

Read each card’s factors with the lab documentation. The number is not a percentage probability. Inputs, formula and limitations

Base score: the implemented formula

Core: designated centre +22; scaffold +18 / payload +16 / linker +10. SMILES +12 (absent −8), InChIKey +4, seed source +3, inherited source −5. Family size min(14, round(log₂(n+1)×3.5)); edges min(8, 2×edges); derived children min(10, 3×children); notes +3.

Derivative: drug +18 / adc +16 / derivative +12; SMILES +12 (absent −8), inherited −5; centre Tanimoto round(22×value); family size min(10, round(log₂(n+1)×2.5)); edges min(8, 2×edges); notes +4. Scores are capped at 100.

Approval, clinical, lead and “hot field” tag bonuses are not used. Tags do not independently verify clinical evidence.

Bins and suggestion limits

Within a pool, approximately the top 12% receive X-S, through 32% X-A, through 62% X-B, and the remainder X-C. Pools smaller than five receive X-B. These are relative ranks within the current records, not externally calibrated grades.

Insight suggestions aggregate family counts, graph density and exploration signals. They do not assess experimental validation, intellectual property, synthetic feasibility or development prospects. Catalog coverage creates selection bias.

Exploration rankings · Catalog insights · Source-backed guides
리서치 랩·계산기사이트 안내바이오 편집 방법개인정보 처리방침문의·오류 제보바이오·분자 구조·한의약 근거를 한 곳에서