A predictive and mechanistic statistical modelling workflow for improving decision making in organic synthesis and catalysis
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
The application of multivariate linear regression models has been widely utilized as a strategy to streamline the reaction optimization process. While these tools likely provide relatively safe predictions, embedding a method for forecasting the probability of achieving the desired reaction outcome would be valuable for streamlining the identification of promising structures with the best chance of success. Herein, we present a workflow that predicts the probability that a reaction will be successful and is easy and quick to apply. We show that this probabilistic framework can effectively differentiate between predictions often indistinguishable by multivariate linear regression analysis. Moreover, these techniques can enhance the development of mechanistically informative correlations by producing more direct pathways for molecular development and design. Overall, we anticipate this protocol will be generally applicable and useful for accelerating successful chemical discovery.
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 | 0.001 | 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 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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