MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4231746082 · doi:10.26434/chemrxiv.9860906.v2

Direct Steering of de novo Molecular Generation using Descriptor Conditional Recurrent Neural Networks (cRNNs)

2019· article· en· W4231746082 on OpenAlexaff
Panagiotis-Christos Kotsias, Josep Arús‐Pous, Hongming Chen, Ola Engkvist, Christian Tyrchan, Esben Jannik Bjerrum

Bibliographic record

VenueChemRxiv · 2019
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicComputational Drug Discovery Methods
Canadian institutionsAstraZeneca (Canada)
Fundersnot available
KeywordsRecurrent neural networkComputer scienceArtificial intelligenceArtificial neural networkGenerative grammarReinforcement learningMachine learning

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Deep learning has acquired considerable momentum over the past couple of years in the domain of de-novo drug design. Particularly, transfer and reinforcement learning have demonstrated the capability of steering the generative process towards chemical regions of interest. In this work, we propose a simple approach to the focused generative task by constructing a conditional recurrent neural network (cRNN). For this purpose, we aggregate selected molecular descriptors along with a QSAR-based bioactivity label and transform them into initial LSTM states before starting the generation of SMILES strings that are focused towards the aspired properties. We thus tackle the inverse QSAR problem directly by training on molecular descriptors, instead of iteratively optimizing around a set of candidate molecules. The trained cRNNs are able to generate molecules near multiple specified conditions, while maintaining an output that is more focused than traditional RNNs yet less focused than autoencoders. The method shows promise for applications in both scaffold hoping and ligand series generation, depending on whether the cRNN is trained on calculated scalar molecular properties or structural fingerprints. This also demonstrates that fingerprint-to-molecule decoding is feasible, leading to molecules that are similar – if not identical – to the ones the fingerprints originated from. Additionally, the cRNN is able to generate a larger fraction of predicted active compounds against the DRD2 receptor when compared to an RNN trained with the transfer learning model.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: Methods
Teacher disagreement score0.002
Threshold uncertainty score0.005

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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 head0.040
GPT teacher head0.292
Teacher spread0.253 · 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

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designSimulation or modeling
Domainnot available
GenreMethods

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".

Quick stats

Citations8
Published2019
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueChemRxivSame topicComputational Drug Discovery MethodsFrench-language works237,207