Accurate prediction of isothermal gas chromatographic Kováts retention indices
Bibliographic record
Abstract
We describe a freely available web server called Retention Index Predictor (RIpred) (https://ripred.ca) that rapidly and accurately predicts Gas Chromatographic Kováts Retention Indices (RI) using SMILES strings as chemical structure input. RIpred performs RI prediction for three different stationary phases (semi-standard non-polar (SSNP), standard non-polar (SNP), and standard polar (SP)) for both derivatized (trimethylsilyl (TMS) and tert‑butyldimethylsilyl (TBDMS) derivatized) and underivatized (base compound) forms of GC-amenable structures. RIpred was developed to address the need for freely available, fast, highly accurate RI predictions for a wide range of derivatized and underivatized chemicals for all common GC stationary phases. RIpred was trained using a Graph Neural Network (GNN) that used compound structures, their extracted features (mostly atom-level features) and the GC-RI data from the National Institute of Standards and Technology databases (NIST 17 and NIST 20). We curated this NIST 17 and NIST 20 GC-RI data, which is available for all three stationary phases, to create appropriate inputs (molecular graphs in this case) needed to enhance our model performance. The performance of different RIpred predictive models was evaluated using 10-fold cross validation (CV). The best performing RIpred models were identified and when tested on hold-out test sets from all stationary phases, achieved a Mean Absolute Error (MAE) of <73 RI units (SSNP: 16.5-29.5, SNP: 38.5-45.9, SP: 46.52-72.53). The Mean Absolute Percentage Error (MAPE) of these models were typically within 3% (SSNP: 0.78-1.62%, SNP: 1.87-2.88%, SP: 2.34-4.05%). When compared to the best performing model by Qu et al., 2021, RIpred performed similarly (MAE of 16.57 RI units [RIpred] vs. 16.84 RI units [Qu et al., 2021 predictor] for derivatized compounds). RIpred also includes ∼5 million predicted RI values for all GC-amenable compounds (∼57,000) in the Human Metabolome Database HMDB 5.0 (Wishart et al., 2022).
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 | 0.002 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.004 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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".