MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2577559092 · doi:10.29007/493z

Modeling Organic Chemistry and Planning Organic Synthesis

2018· article· en· W2577559092 on OpenAlex

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.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.
fundA Canadian funder is recorded on the work.

Bibliographic record

VenueEPiC series in computing · 2018
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicSemantic Web and Ontologies
Canadian institutionsToronto Metropolitan University
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada
KeywordsComputer scienceBenchmark (surveying)Set (abstract data type)Domain (mathematical analysis)Organic moleculesArtificial intelligenceTheoretical computer scienceChemistryProgramming languageMoleculeMathematicsOrganic chemistry

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Organic Synthesis is a computationally challenging practical problem concerned with constructing a target molecule from a set of initially available molecules via chemical reactions. This paper demonstrates how organic synthesis can be formulated as a planning problem in Artificial Intelligence, and how it can be explored using the state-of-the-art domain independent planners. To this end, we develop a methodology to represent chemical molecules and generic reactions in PDDL 2.2, a version of the standardized Planning Domain Definition Language popular in AI. In our model, derived predicates define common functional groups and chemical classes in chemistry, and actions correspond to generic chemical reactions. We develop a set of benchmark problems. Since PDDL is supported as an input language by many modern planners, our benchmark can be subsequently useful for empirical assessment of the performance of various state-of-the-art planners.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.958
Threshold uncertainty score0.584

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.020
GPT teacher head0.254
Teacher spread0.233 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it