Abstract IA004: Overcoming traditional design limitations with AI-based discovery
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The properties of a new drug are set at the point of design, including any potential design flaws. Many small molecules that make it to human trials fail to progress beyond Phase 1 due to these flaws, which manifest as unacceptable side effects (either alone or in combination), meaning the drug (and therefore the pathway it is modulating) can never be adequately evaluated. This presentation will highlight how, through the thoughtful generation of a precise target candidate profile (TCP) and the subsequent use of GenAI, clinical candidates can now be precision designed to more exacting standards. Such molecules have the potential to have improved therapeutic indices, even against protein targets that are usually associated with mechanism-based adverse events. Citation Format: David J. Hallett. Overcoming traditional design limitations with AI-based discovery. [abstract]. In: Proceedings of the AACR Special Conference in Cancer Research: Optimizing Therapeutic Efficacy and Tolerability through Cancer Chemistry; 2024 Dec 9-11; Toronto, Ontario, Canada. Philadelphia (PA): AACR; Mol Cancer Ther 2024;23(12_Suppl):Abstract nr IA004
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 | 0.012 | 0.026 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.004 | 0.003 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.008 | 0.003 |
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".