Enhanced Thompson Sampling by Roulette Wheel Selection for Screening Ultra-Large Combinatorial Libraries
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
ABSTRACT Chemical space exploration has gained significant interest with the increase in available building blocks, which enables the creation of ultra-large virtual libraries containing billions or even trillions of compounds. However, the challenge of selecting most suitable compounds for synthesis arises, and one such challenge is hit expansion. Recently, Thompson sampling, a probabilistic search approach, has been proposed by Walters et al . to achieve efficiency gains by operating in the reagent space rather than the product space. Here, we aim to address some of its shortcomings and propose optimizations. We introduce a warmup routine to ensure that initial probabilities are set for all reagents with a minimum number of molecules evaluated. Additionally, a roulette wheel selection is proposed with adapted stop criteria to improve sampling efficiency, and belief distributions of reagents are only updated when they appear in new molecules. We demonstrate that a 100% recovery rate can be achieved by sampling 0.1% of the fully enumerated library, showcasing the effectiveness of our proposed optimizations.
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.
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 | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| 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 it