A Mechanism to Open Academic Chemistry to High-Throughput Virtual Screening
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Computationally screening chemical libraries to discover molecules with desired properties is a common technique used in early-stage drug discovery. Recent progress in the field now enables the efficient exploration of billions of molecules within days or hours, but this exploration remains confined within the boundaries of the accessible chemistry space. While the number of commercially available compounds grows rapidly, it remains a limited subset of molecules that could be synthesized. Here, we present a workflow where chemical reactions typically developed in academia and unconventional in drug discovery are exploited to dramatically expand the chemistry space accessible to virtual screening. We use this process to generate a first version of the Pan-Canadian Chemical Library, a collection of nearly 150 billion diverse compounds that does not overlap with other ultra-large libraries such as Enamine REAL or SAVI and could be a resource of choice for protein targets where other libraries have failed to deliver bioactive molecules. A 127 million compound subset of the library is available at https://pccl.thesgc.org/.
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 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.009 | 0.038 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
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; both teacher heads agree on what is shown here.
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".