H. Geppert, M. Vogt, and J. Bajorath, Current Trends in Ligand-Based Virtual Screening: Molecular Representations, Data Mining Methods, New Application Areas, and Performance Evaluation, Journal of Chemical Information and Modeling, vol.50, issue.2, pp.205-216, 2010.
DOI : 10.1021/ci900419k

H. Eckert and J. Bajorath, Molecular similarity analysis in virtual screening: foundations, limitations and novel approaches, Drug Discovery Today, vol.12, issue.5-6, pp.225-233, 2007.
DOI : 10.1016/j.drudis.2007.01.011

S. Putta and P. Beroza, Shapes of Things: Computer Modeling of Molecular Shape in Drug Discovery, Current Topics in Medicinal Chemistry, vol.7, issue.15, pp.1514-1524, 2007.
DOI : 10.2174/156802607782194770

R. D. Brown and Y. C. Martin, Use of Structure???Activity Data To Compare Structure-Based Clustering Methods and Descriptors for Use in Compound Selection, Journal of Chemical Information and Computer Sciences, vol.36, issue.3, pp.572-584, 1996.
DOI : 10.1021/ci9501047

A. Schuffenhauer, V. J. Gillet, and P. Willett, Similarity Searching in Files of Three-Dimensional Chemical Structures: Analysis of the BIOSTER Database Using Two-Dimensional Fingerprints and Molecular Field Descriptors, J. Chem. Inf. Model, vol.40, pp.295-307, 2000.

J. H. Nettles, J. L. Jenkins, A. Bender, Z. Deng, J. W. Davies et al., Bridging Chemical and Biological Space:?? ???Target Fishing??? Using 2D and 3D Molecular Descriptors, Journal of Medicinal Chemistry, vol.49, issue.23
DOI : 10.1021/jm060902w

P. Watson, Virtual Screening Using Protein-Ligand Docking: Avoiding Artificial Enrichment

E. Kellenberger, J. Rodrigo, P. Muller, and D. Rognan, Comparative evaluation of eight docking tools for docking and virtual screening accuracy, Proteins: Structure, Function, and Bioinformatics, vol.46, issue.2, pp.225-242, 2004.
DOI : 10.1002/prot.20149

J. B. Cross, D. C. Thompson, B. K. Rai, J. C. Baber, K. Y. Fan et al., Comparison of Several Molecular Docking Programs: Pose Prediction and Virtual Screening Accuracy, Journal of Chemical Information and Modeling, vol.49, issue.6, pp.1455-1474, 2009.
DOI : 10.1021/ci900056c

W. Deng and C. L. Verlinde, Evaluation of Different Virtual Screening Programs for Docking in a Charged Binding Pocket, Journal of Chemical Information and Modeling, vol.48, issue.10, pp.2010-2020, 2008.
DOI : 10.1021/ci800154w

P. Tiikkainen, P. Markt, G. Wolber, J. Kirchmair, S. Distinto et al., Critical Comparison of Virtual Screening Methods against the MUV Data Set, Journal of Chemical Information and Modeling, vol.49, issue.10
DOI : 10.1021/ci900249b

T. J. Cheeseright, M. D. Mackey, J. L. Melville, and J. G. Vinter, FieldScreen: Virtual Screening Using Molecular Fields. Application to the DUD Data Set, Journal of Chemical Information and Modeling, vol.48, issue.11, pp.2108-2117, 2008.
DOI : 10.1021/ci800110p

G. B. Mcgaughey, R. P. Sheridan, C. I. Bayly, J. C. Culberson, C. Kreatsoulas et al., Comparison of Topological, Shape, and Docking Methods in Virtual Screening, Journal of Chemical Information and Modeling, vol.47, issue.4, pp.1504-1519, 2007.
DOI : 10.1021/ci700052x

P. C. Hawkins, A. G. Skillman, and A. Nicholls, Comparison of Shape-Matching and Docking as Virtual Screening Tools, Journal of Medicinal Chemistry, vol.50, issue.1, pp.74-82, 2007.
DOI : 10.1021/jm0603365

N. Huang, B. K. Shoichet, and J. J. Irwin, Benchmarking Sets for Molecular Docking, Journal of Medicinal Chemistry, vol.49, issue.23, pp.6789-6801, 2006.
DOI : 10.1021/jm0608356

S. G. Rohrer and K. Baumann, Maximum Unbiased Validation (MUV) Data Sets for Virtual Screening Based on PubChem Bioactivity Data, Journal of Chemical Information and Modeling, vol.49, issue.2, pp.169-184, 2009.
DOI : 10.1021/ci8002649

H. S. Lee, C. S. Lee, J. S. Kim, D. H. Kim, and H. Choe, Improving Virtual Screening Performance against Conformational Variations of Receptors by Shape Matching with Ligand Binding Pocket, Journal of Chemical Information and Modeling, vol.49, issue.11, pp.2419-2428, 2009.
DOI : 10.1021/ci9002365

M. Von-korff, J. Freyss, and T. Sander, Comparison of Ligand- and Structure-Based Virtual Screening on the DUD Data Set, Journal of Chemical Information and Modeling, vol.49, issue.2, pp.209-231, 2009.
DOI : 10.1021/ci800303k

J. J. Irwin, Community benchmarks for virtual screening, Journal of Computer-Aided Molecular Design, vol.28, issue.3-4, pp.193-199, 2008.
DOI : 10.1007/s10822-008-9189-4

A. C. Good and T. Oprea, Optimization of CAMD techniques 3. Virtual screening enrichment studies: a help or hindrance in tool selection?, Journal of Computer-Aided Molecular Design, vol.13, issue.3-4, pp.169-178, 2008.
DOI : 10.1007/s10822-007-9167-2

M. J. Vainio, J. S. Puranen, M. S. Johnson, and . Shaep, ShaEP: Molecular Overlay Based on Shape and Electrostatic Potential, Journal of Chemical Information and Modeling, vol.49, issue.2, pp.492-502, 2009.
DOI : 10.1021/ci800315d

A. Jahn, G. Hinselmann, N. Fechner, and A. Zell, Optimal assignment methods for ligand-based virtual screening, Journal of Cheminformatics, vol.1, issue.1, p.14, 2009.
DOI : 10.1186/1758-2946-1-14

S. L. Kinnings and R. M. Jackson, LigMatch: A Multiple Structure-Based Ligand Matching Method for 3D Virtual Screening, Journal of Chemical Information and Modeling, vol.49, issue.9, pp.2056-2066, 2009.
DOI : 10.1021/ci900204y

D. Giganti, H. Guillemain, J. Spadoni, M. Nilges, J. Zagury et al., Comparative Evaluation of 3D Virtual Ligand Screening Methods: Impact of the Molecular Alignment on Enrichment, Journal of Chemical Information and Modeling, vol.50, issue.6, pp.992-1004, 2010.
DOI : 10.1021/ci900507g

A. Nicholls, What do we know and when do we know it?, Journal of Computer-Aided Molecular Design, vol.47, issue.2, pp.239-255, 2008.
DOI : 10.1007/s10822-008-9170-2

J. Kirchmair, S. Distinto, P. Markt, D. Schuster, G. M. Spitzer et al., How To Optimize Shape-Based Virtual Screening: Choosing the Right Query and Including Chemical Information, Journal of Chemical Information and Modeling, vol.49, issue.3, pp.678-692, 2009.
DOI : 10.1021/ci8004226

A. Bender, H. Y. Mussa, R. C. Glen, and S. Reiling, Similarity Searching of Chemical Databases Using Atom Environment Descriptors (MOLPRINT 2D):??? Evaluation of Performance, Journal of Chemical Information and Computer Sciences, vol.44, issue.5, pp.1708-1718, 2004.
DOI : 10.1021/ci0498719

J. A. Grant, M. A. Gallardo, and B. T. Pickup, A fast method of molecular shape comparison: A simple application of a Gaussian description of molecular shape, Journal of Computational Chemistry, vol.17, issue.14, pp.1653-1666, 1996.
DOI : 10.1002/(SICI)1096-987X(19961115)17:14<1653::AID-JCC7>3.0.CO;2-K

J. Lin and T. Clark, An Analytical, Variable Resolution, Complete Description of Static Molecules and Their Intermolecular Binding Properties, Journal of Chemical Information and Modeling, vol.45, issue.4, pp.1010-1016, 2005.
DOI : 10.1021/ci050059v

P. J. Ballester and W. G. Richards, Ultrafast shape recognition to search compound databases for similar molecular shapes, Journal of Computational Chemistry, vol.1, issue.10, pp.1711-1723, 2007.
DOI : 10.1002/jcc.20681
URL : http://citeseerx.ist.psu.edu/viewdoc/summary?doi=10.1.1.612.6664

L. Mavridis, B. D. Hudson, and D. W. Ritchie, Toward High Throughput 3D Virtual Screening Using Spherical Harmonic Surface Representations, Journal of Chemical Information and Modeling, vol.47, issue.5, pp.1787-1796, 2007.
DOI : 10.1021/ci7001507
URL : https://hal.archives-ouvertes.fr/inria-00434267

J. Kirchmair, P. Markt, S. Distinto, G. Wolber, and T. Langer, Evaluation of the performance of 3D virtual screening protocols: RMSD comparisons, enrichment assessments, and decoy selection???What can we learn from earlier mistakes?, Journal of Computer-Aided Molecular Design, vol.47, issue.3-4, pp.213-228, 2008.
DOI : 10.1007/s10822-007-9163-6

E. J. Barker, E. J. Gardiner, V. J. Gillet, P. Kitts, and J. Morris, Further Development of Reduced Graphs for Identifying Bioactive Compounds, J. Chem. Inf. Model, vol.43, pp.346-356, 2003.

M. D. Mackey and J. L. Melville, Better than Random? The Chemotype Enrichment Problem, Journal of Chemical Information and Modeling, vol.49, issue.5
DOI : 10.1021/ci8003978

J. Truchon and C. Bayly, Evaluating Virtual Screening Methods:?? Good and Bad Metrics for the ???Early Recognition??? Problem, Journal of Chemical Information and Modeling, vol.47, issue.2, pp.488-508, 2007.
DOI : 10.1021/ci600426e

W. Zhao, K. Hevener, S. White, R. Lee, and J. Boyett, A statistical framework to evaluate virtual screening, BMC Bioinformatics, vol.10, issue.1, p.225, 2009.
DOI : 10.1186/1471-2105-10-225
URL : http://doi.org/10.1186/1471-2105-10-225

R. P. Sheridan, Alternative Global Goodness Metrics and Sensitivity Analysis:?? Heuristics to Check the Robustness of Conclusions from Studies Comparing Virtual Screening Methods, Journal of Chemical Information and Modeling, vol.48, issue.2
DOI : 10.1021/ci700380x

S. J. Swamidass, C. Azencott, K. Daily, and P. Baldi, A CROC stronger than ROC: measuring, visualizing and optimizing early retrieval, Bioinformatics, vol.26, issue.10, pp.1348-1356, 2010.
DOI : 10.1093/bioinformatics/btq140
URL : http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2865862

J. A. Hanley and B. J. Mcneil, The meaning and use of the area under a receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curve., Radiology, vol.143, issue.1, pp.29-36, 1982.
DOI : 10.1148/radiology.143.1.7063747

T. Fawcett, An introduction to ROC analysis. Pattern Recogn, pp.861-874, 2006.
DOI : 10.1016/j.patrec.2005.10.010
URL : http://citeseerx.ist.psu.edu/viewdoc/summary?doi=10.1.1.646.2144

P. C. Hawkins, G. L. Warren, A. G. Skillman, and A. Nicholls, How to do an evaluation: pitfalls and traps, Journal of Computer-Aided Molecular Design, vol.21, issue.3-4, pp.179-190, 2008.
DOI : 10.1007/s10822-007-9166-3
URL : http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2270914

S. A. Macskassy, F. Provost, and S. Rosset, ROC confidence bands, Proceedings of the 22nd international conference on Machine learning , ICML '05, pp.537-544, 2005.
DOI : 10.1145/1102351.1102419

F. J. Provost, T. Fawcett, and R. Kohavi, The Case against Accuracy Estimation for Comparing Induction Algorithms, ICML '98: In Proceedings of the Fifteenth International Conference on Machine Learning, pp.445-453, 1998.

J. Böstrom, J. R. Greenwood, and J. Gottfries, Assessing the performance of OMEGA with respect to retrieving bioactive conformations, Journal of Molecular Graphics and Modelling, vol.21, issue.5, pp.449-462, 2003.
DOI : 10.1016/S1093-3263(02)00204-8

D. W. Ritchie and G. J. Kemp, Protein docking using spherical polar Fourier correlations, Proteins: Structure, Function, and Genetics, vol.3, issue.2, pp.178-194, 2000.
DOI : 10.1002/(SICI)1097-0134(20000501)39:2<178::AID-PROT8>3.0.CO;2-6
URL : https://hal.archives-ouvertes.fr/inria-00434273

S. W. Muchmore, S. P. Brown, J. A. Grant, J. A. Haigh, N. Nevins et al., Molecular Shape and Medicinal Chemistry: A Perspective, J. Med. Chem, vol.53, pp.3862-3886, 2010.

H. Sato, L. M. Shewchuk, and J. Tang, Prediction of Multiple Binding Modes of the CDK2 Inhibitors, Anilinopyrazoles, Using the Automated Docking Programs GOLD, FlexX, and LigandFit: An Evaluation of Performance., ChemInform, vol.46, issue.8, pp.2552-2562, 2006.
DOI : 10.1002/chin.200708204

E. R. Hickey, N. Moss, S. Pav, and J. Regan, Inhibition of p38 MAP kinase by utilizing a novel allosteric binding site, Nat. Struct. Biol, vol.9, pp.268-272, 2002.

H. Steuber, M. Zentgraf, C. L. Motta, S. Sartini, A. Heine et al., Evidence for a Novel Binding Site Conformer of Aldose Reductase in Ligand-Bound State???, Journal of Molecular Biology, vol.369, issue.1, pp.186-197, 2007.
DOI : 10.1016/j.jmb.2007.03.021

V. I. Pérez-nueno, D. W. Ritchie, J. I. Borrell, and J. Teixidó, Clustering and Classifying Diverse HIV Entry Inhibitors Using a Novel Consensus Shape-Based Virtual Screening Approach

J. C. Baber, W. A. Shirley, Y. Gao, and M. Feher, The Use of Consensus Scoring in Ligand-Based Virtual Screening, Journal of Chemical Information and Modeling, vol.46, issue.1, pp.277-288, 2006.
DOI : 10.1021/ci050296y