Using GNN property predictors as molecule generators
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Graph neural networks (GNNs) have emerged as powerful tools to accurately predict materials and molecular properties in computational and automated discovery pipelines. In this article, we exploit the invertible nature of these neural networks to directly generate molecular structures with desired electronic properties. Starting from a random graph or an existing molecule, we perform a gradient ascent while holding the GNN weights fixed in order to optimize its input, the molecular graph, towards the target property. Valence rules are enforced strictly through a judicious graph construction. The method relies entirely on the property predictor; no additional training is required on molecular structures. We demonstrate the application of this method by generating molecules with specific energy gaps verified with density functional theory (DFT) and with specific octanol-water partition coefficients (logP). Our approach hits target properties with rates comparable to or better than state-of-the-art generative models while consistently generating more diverse molecules. Moreover, while validating our framework we created a dataset of 1617 new molecules and their corresponding DFT-calculated properties that could serve as an out-of-distribution test set for QM9-trained models.
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 | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 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) | 0.003 | 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; 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".