Data-science driven autonomous process optimization
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
Autonomous process optimization involves the human intervention-free exploration of a range process parameters to improve responses such as product yield and selectivity. Utilizing off-the-shelf components, we develop a closed-loop system for carrying out parallel autonomous process optimization experiments in batch. Upon implementation of our system in the optimization of a stereoselective Suzuki-Miyaura coupling, we find that the definition of a set of meaningful, broad, and unbiased process parameters is the most critical aspect of successful optimization. Importantly, we discern that phosphine ligand, a categorical parameter, is vital to determination of the reaction outcome. To date, categorical parameter selection has relied on chemical intuition, potentially introducing bias into the experimental design. In seeking a systematic method for selecting a diverse set of phosphine ligands, we develop a strategy that leverages computed molecular feature clustering. The resulting optimization uncovers conditions to selectively access the desired product isomer in high yield.
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 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| 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