Phoenics: A Bayesian Optimizer for Chemistry
Bibliographic record
Abstract
We report Phoenics, a probabilistic global optimization algorithm identifying the set of conditions of an experimental or computational procedure which satisfies desired targets. Phoenics combines ideas from Bayesian optimization with concepts from Bayesian kernel density estimation. As such, Phoenics allows to tackle typical optimization problems in chemistry for which objective evaluations are limited, due to either budgeted resources or time-consuming evaluations of the conditions, including experimentation or enduring computations. Phoenics proposes new conditions based on all previous observations, avoiding, thus, redundant evaluations to locate the optimal conditions. It enables an efficient parallel search based on intuitive sampling strategies implicitly biasing toward exploration or exploitation of the search space. Our benchmarks indicate that Phoenics is less sensitive to the response surface than already established optimization algorithms. We showcase the applicability of Phoenics on the Oregonator, a complex case-study describing a nonlinear chemical reaction network. Despite the large search space, Phoenics quickly identifies the conditions which yield the desired target dynamic behavior. Overall, we recommend Phoenics for rapid optimization of unknown expensive-to-evaluate objective functions, such as experimentation or long-lasting computations.
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.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.003 | 0.009 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.012 | 0.004 |
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 itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".