Data-science driven autonomous process optimization
Bibliographic record
Abstract
<p>Autonomous process optimization involves the human intervention-free exploration of a range of pre-defined process parameters in order to improve responses such as reaction yield and product selectivity. Utilizing off-the-shelf components, we developed a closed-loop system capable of carrying out parallel autonomous process optimization experiments in batch with significantly reduced cycle times. Upon implementation of our system in the autonomous optimization of a palladium-catalyzed stereoselective Suzuki-Miyaura coupling, we found that the definition of a set of meaningful, broad, and unbiased process parameters was the most critical aspect of a successful optimization. In addition, we found that categorical parameters such as phosphine ligand were vital to determining the reaction outcome. To date, categorical parameter selection has relied on chemical intuition, potentially introducing an element of bias into the experimental design. In seeking a systematic method for the selection of a diverse set of phosphine ligands fully representative of the chemical space, we developed a strategy that leveraged computed molecular descriptor clustering analysis. This strategy allowed for the successful autonomous optimization of a stereoselective Suzuki-Miyaura coupling between a vinyl sulfonate and an arylboronic acid to selectively generate the <i>E</i>-product isomer in high yield. </p>
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 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 | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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 itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, 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".