MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4285179478 · doi:10.1039/d2dd00003b

Parallel tempered genetic algorithm guided by deep neural networks for inverse molecular design

2022· article· en· W4285179478 on OpenAlexafffund
AkshatKumar Nigam, Robert Pollice, Alán Aspuru‐Guzik

Bibliographic record

VenueDigital Discovery · 2022
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicComputational Drug Discovery Methods
Canadian institutionsVector InstituteCanadian Institute for Advanced ResearchUniversity of Toronto
FundersNatural Resources CanadaCompute CanadaSimon Fraser UniversitySchweizerischer Nationalfonds zur Förderung der Wissenschaftlichen ForschungNational Science Foundation
KeywordsInverseComputer scienceArtificial neural networkJanusArtificial intelligenceGenetic algorithmDeep learningDeep neural networksSampling (signal processing)PopulationTemperingAlgorithmMachine learningTheoretical computer scienceMathematicsMaterials scienceComputer visionMedicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

population-based metaheuristic optimization algorithms such as evolutionary algorithms. However, often unavoidable expensive property evaluation can limit the widespread use of such approaches as the associated cost can become prohibitive. Herein, we present JANUS, a genetic algorithm inspired by parallel tempering. It propagates two populations, one for exploration and another for exploitation, improving optimization by reducing property evaluations. JANUS is augmented by a deep neural network that approximates molecular properties and relies on active learning for enhanced molecular sampling. It uses the SELFIES representation and the STONED algorithm for the efficient generation of structures, and outperforms other generative models in common inverse molecular design tasks achieving state-of-the-art target metrics across multiple benchmarks. As neither most of the benchmarks nor the structure generator in JANUS account for synthesizability, a significant fraction of the proposed molecules is synthetically infeasible demonstrating that this aspect needs to be considered when evaluating the performance of molecular generative models.

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)0.001
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 score0.007

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
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 head0.024
GPT teacher head0.266
Teacher spread0.242 · 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

Citations95
Published2022
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueDigital DiscoverySame topicComputational Drug Discovery MethodsFrench-language works237,207