MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4409727735 · doi:10.2196/69800

Harnessing AI and Quantum Computing for Revolutionizing Drug Discovery and Approval Processes: Case Example for Collagen Toxicity

2025· article· en· W4409727735 on OpenAlex
David Melvin Braga

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.

venuePublished in a venue whose home country is Canada.
no affNo Canadian affiliation: this work is invisible to an affiliation-only frame.
No Canadian affiliation. An affiliation-only frame, the usual design, would never have seen this work. It is one of the works that make the case for inverting the frame.

Bibliographic record

VenueJMIR Bioinformatics and Biotechnology · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
Topic3D Printing in Biomedical Research
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPreprintDrug discoveryComputer scienceNanotechnologyWorld Wide WebBioinformaticsMaterials scienceBiology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Unlabelled: Artificial intelligence (AI) and quantum computing will change the course of new drug discovery and approval. By generating computational data, predicting the efficacy of pharmaceuticals, and assessing their safety, AI and quantum computing can accelerate and optimize the process of identifying potential drug candidates. In this viewpoint, we demonstrate how computational models obtained from digital computers, AI, and quantum computing can reduce the number of laboratory and animal experiments; thus, computer-aided drug development can help to provide safe and effective combinations while minimizing the costs and time in drug development. To support this argument, 83 academic publications were reviewed, pharmaceutical manufacturers were interviewed, and AI was used to run computational data for determining the toxicity of collagen as a case example. The research evidence to date has mainly focused on the ability to create computational in silico data for comparison to actual laboratory data and the use of these data to discover or approve newly discovered drugs. In this context, "in silico" describes scientific studies performed using computer algorithms, simulations, or digital models to analyze biological, chemical, or physical processes without the need for laboratory (in vitro) or live (in vivo) experiments. Digital computers, AI, and quantum computing offer unique capabilities to tackle complex problems in drug discovery, which is a critical challenge in pharmaceutical research. Regulatory agents will need to adapt to these new technologies. Regulatory processes may become more streamlined, using adaptive clinical trials, accelerating pathways, and better integrating digital data to reduce the time and cost of bringing new drugs to market. Computational data methods could be used to reduce the cost and time involved in experimental drug discovery, allowing researchers to simulate biological interactions and screen large compound libraries more efficiently. Creating in silico data for drug discovery involves several stages, each using specific methods such as simulations, synthetic data generation, data augmentation, and tools to generate, collect, and affect human interaction to identify and develop new drugs.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.977
Threshold uncertainty score0.515

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.017
GPT teacher head0.287
Teacher spread0.271 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it