MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Molecular Property Prediction based on Bimodal Supervised Contrastive Learning

2022· article· en· W4313526690 on OpenAlexafffund
Yan Sun, Mohaiminul Islam, Ehsan Zahedi, Mélaine A. Kuenemann, Hassan Chouaib, Pingzhao Hu

Bibliographic record

Venue2022 IEEE International Conference on Bioinformatics and Biomedicine (BIBM) · 2022
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicComputational Drug Discovery Methods
Canadian institutionsUniversity of ManitobaArtificial Intelligence in Medicine (Canada)
FundersMitacs
KeywordsComputer scienceGraphArtificial intelligenceMolecular graphMachine learningTheoretical computer scienceConvolutional neural networkEncoding (memory)Natural language processingPattern recognition (psychology)

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The simplified molecular-input line-entry system (SMILES) and the molecular graph are commonly used in chem-informatics to represent a molecule. Transformers are widely used for encoding SMILES to learn the relationship between elements that are far away from each other, while Graph Convolutional Networks (GCNs) are popular in graph representation learning and mostly focus on local structures. Since different information can be extracted from the SMILES string and the molecular graph, their integration might benefit the molecular property prediction task. In this work, we propose a bimodal supervised contrastive learning (BSCL) framework to integrate the SMILES string and the molecular graph in a unified network. Furthermore, the vanilla supervised contrastive loss (SCL) is not suitable for regression tasks, hence we design a weighted SCL to solve the problem. Six publicly available molecular property datasets are used to evaluate the proposed BSCL method, and our results show that the proposed bimodal method is superior to using the SMILES string or the molecular graph alone. Our code is released at https://github.com syanl992/BSCL.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation 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: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.900
Threshold uncertainty score0.668

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.038
GPT teacher head0.289
Teacher spread0.251 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

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

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

Citations2
Published2022
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venue2022 IEEE International Conference on Bioinformatics and Biomedicine (BIBM)Same topicComputational Drug Discovery MethodsFrench-language works237,207