New Quantitative Structure–Activity Relationship Models Improve Predictability of Ames Mutagenicity for Aromatic Azo Compounds
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Existing Quantitative Structure-Activity Relationship (QSAR) models have limited predictive capabilities for aromatic azo compounds. In this study, 2 new models were built to predict Ames mutagenicity of this class of compounds. The first one made use of descriptors based on simplified molecular input-line entry system (SMILES), calculated with the CORAL software. The second model was based on the k-nearest neighbors algorithm. The statistical quality of the predictions from single models was satisfactory. The performance further improved when the predictions from these models were combined. The prediction results from other QSAR models for mutagenicity were also evaluated. Most of the existing models were found to be good at finding toxic compounds but resulted in many false positive predictions. The 2 new models specific for this class of compounds avoid this problem thanks to a larger set of related compounds as training set and improved algorithms.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it