RosettaAMRLD: A Reaction-Driven Approach for Structure-Based Drug Design from Combinatorial Libraries with Monte Carlo Metropolis Algorithms
Bibliographic record
Abstract
High Resolution Image Download MS PowerPoint Slide The Rosetta automated Monte Carlo reaction-based ligand design (RosettaAMRLD) integrates a Monte Carlo Metropolis (MCM) algorithm and reaction-driven molecule proposal to enhance structure-based de novo drug discovery. By leveraging combinatorial ultralarge libraries, RosettaAMRLD ensures synthetic accessibility, optimizing protein–ligand interactions while efficiently sampling accessible chemical space. Importantly, RosettaAMRLD can be initiated without a known binder, broadening its applicability to novel pharmaceutical targets. We applied RosettaAMRLD to three protein classes typically targeted by drugs, demonstrating its ability to generate novel, synthetically accessible ligands with active-like binding poses. Benchmark results show that RosettaAMRLD can propose diverse ligands with significantly improved docking scores compared to random sampling, and multiround iteration further enhances output quality, resulting in molecules with in silico properties exceeding those of known actives. The method’s capability to explore ultralarge chemical spaces and generate novel drug-like molecules highlights its potential in early stage drug discovery.
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 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| 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 | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.007 | 0.002 |
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".