MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4411068910 · doi:10.1021/acs.jcim.5c00197

Machine Learning Based Quantitative Structure–Dissolution Profile Relationship

2025· article· en· W4411068910 on OpenAlexafffund
Lap Au-Yeung, Chih‐Yuan Tseng, Yun K. Tam, Peichun Amy Tsai

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Chemical Information and Modeling · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicMineral Processing and Grinding
Canadian institutionsPCL Construction (Canada)University of Alberta
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of CanadaAlberta Innovates
KeywordsDissolutionComputer scienceChemistryArtificial intelligencePhysical chemistry

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Determining accurate drug dissolution processes in the gastrointestinal tract is critical in drug discovery as dissolution profiles provide essential information for estimating the bioavailability of orally administered drugs. While various methods have been developed to predict drug solubility based on chemical structures, no reliable tools currently exist for predicting the dissolution rate constant. This study presents a novel two-stage machine learning approach, termed Machine Learning based Quantitative Structure–Dissolution Profile Relationship, which integrates physics-informed neural networks (PINNs) and deep neural networks (DNNs) to predict drug dissolution profiles in water, with varying concentrations of surfactant Sodium Lauryl Sulfate. In the first stage, PINNs extract key dissolution parameters─namely the dissolution rate constant ( k ) and the dissolved mass fraction at saturation (ϕ s )─from existing dissolution data. By leveraging a physical law governing the dissolution process, PINNs aim to enhance prediction performance and reduce data requirements. Assuming first-order kinetics of the drug dissolution process as described by the Noyes–Whitney equation, PINNs, with 8 hidden layers and 40 neurons per layer, may outperform traditional nonlinear regression by effectively filtering noise and focusing on physically meaningful data. In the second stage, these extracted parameters ( k and ϕ s ) are used to train a DNN to predict dissolution profiles based on the drug’s chemical structure and dissolution medium. Using the FDA-recommended metrics: the difference and similarity factors ( f 1 and f 2 ), the DNN─with 128 neurons in two hidden layers and a learning rate of 10 –2.8 ─achieved an average testing accuracy of 61.7% at an 80:20 train-to-test split. Although this current accuracy is below the generally acceptable range of 70–80%, this approach shows significant potential as a low-cost, time-efficient tool for early phase drug formulation. Future improvements are expected as data quality and diversity increase.

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 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: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.399
Threshold uncertainty score0.204

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 communication0.0000.001
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 head0.022
GPT teacher head0.268
Teacher spread0.245 · 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

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designSimulation or modeling
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations6
Published2025
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Chemical Information and ModelingSame topicMineral Processing and GrindingFrench-language works237,207