Integrating transformers and many-objective optimization for drug design
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Drug design is a challenging and important task that requires the generation of novel and effective molecules that can bind to specific protein targets. Artificial intelligence algorithms have recently showed promising potential to expedite the drug design process. However, existing methods adopt multi-objective approaches which limits the number of objectives. RESULTS: In this paper, we expand this thread of research from the many-objective perspective, by proposing a novel framework that integrates a latent Transformer-based model for molecular generation, with a drug design system that incorporates absorption, distribution, metabolism, excretion, and toxicity prediction, molecular docking, and many-objective metaheuristics. We compared the performance of two latent Transformer models (ReLSO and FragNet) on a molecular generation task and show that ReLSO outperforms FragNet in terms of reconstruction and latent space organization. We then explored six different many-objective metaheuristics based on evolutionary algorithms and particle swarm optimization on a drug design task involving potential drug candidates to human lysophosphatidic acid receptor 1, a cancer-related protein target. CONCLUSION: We show that multi-objective evolutionary algorithm based on dominance and decomposition performs the best in terms of finding molecules that satisfy many objectives, such as high binding affinity and low toxicity, and high drug-likeness. Our framework demonstrates the potential of combining Transformers and many-objective computational intelligence for drug design.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".