## 3 Results and Discussion
### The Distribution of the Docking Scores  
To understand the distribution of the scores obtained from the seven docking scores used for the ranking of the 262 potential drug candidates, from the three samples of the traditional conococtions and the two known drugs with the level of overlap of the docking scores in the ranking of the molecules, we normalized all of the docking scores using the normalizing expression explained for the consensus AASS. The plots of the distribution of the normalized docking scores of all of the molecules across the seven docking scores showing their level of overlap, are shown in Figure 2. The distributions for each of the seven docking scores are added to the Supplementary Figure S1.  
The results of the distribution show that the scores of the ligands have a relatively normal distribution in the seven docking scores. The normal distribution is an indication that the molecules are grouped into three major groups, comprised of a small number of most active molecules on the extreme left, a large number of molecules as less active in the middle, and a small number of non-active molecules on the extreme right.  
The pick of the distribution from the Rerank score is found towards the left of the others and is higher than others, indicating that it ranked many of the molecules as active, more than the other docking scores. The mean value of the docking scores from Mlodock, Vina, Glide, and the three Haddock scores, are closer to each other than to the Rerank scores, indicating a much more similar distribution among the six excluding, the Rerank scores (Figure 2). Furthermore, the plots of the multi-variance relationship that show the level of correlation among the seven docking scores in the ranking of the molecules are shown in Figure 3. The plots of the multivariance analysis in Figure 3 clearly show that in the three targets, the ranking of the ligands by Mlodock and Haddock(flex) have a significant level of correlation which also included Haddock(flex, water), in the target BCL-2 and its  
Figure 2: The distribution of the normalized docking scores of all of the molecules across the seven docking scores, showing the level of overlap and mean value (dash line).  
mutated BCL-2 G101V. The scores from Haddock(flex) and Haddock(flex, water) are also significantly correlated and there is a relatively fair correlation between Glide and Vina.  
The distribution of the five consensus methods that were used to combine the docking scores, is shown in Figure S2. The methods RbN, RbR, AASS, and ZP also follow the normal distribution, indicating a few numbers of the molecules as active compounds on the extreme left side of the distribution. The distribution using the consensus ECR does not show a normal distribution; it has a higher number of molecules on the extreme left. Since the ranking of the ECR is different from the other consensus methods, in the sense that the active molecule will have the highest score values, it also clearly shows that the active compounds are a small proportion of the molecules on the extreme right of the distribution, in relation with the small number of active molecules found on the extreme left of the other consensus methods.