MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4416131921 · doi:10.48550/arxiv.2506.04439

RETRO SYNFLOW: Discrete Flow Matching for Accurate and Diverse Single-Step Retrosynthesis

2025· preprint· en· W4416131921 on OpenAlexfundno aff
Qi Yan, Guy Wolf, Avishek Joey Bose, Renjie Liao

Bibliographic record

VenueArXiv.org · 2025
Typepreprint
Languageen
FieldMaterials Science
TopicMachine Learning in Materials Science
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of CanadaEngineering and Physical Sciences Research CouncilAlliance de recherche numérique du CanadaCanadian Institute for Advanced ResearchVector InstituteUniversity of British ColumbiaGovernment of Canada
KeywordsOracleInferenceSet (abstract data type)Matching (statistics)ResamplingIdentification (biology)Retrosynthetic analysisProduct (mathematics)Metric (unit)

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

A fundamental problem in organic chemistry is identifying and predicting the series of reactions that synthesize a desired target product molecule. Due to the combinatorial nature of the chemical search space, single-step reactant prediction -- i.e. single-step retrosynthesis -- remains challenging even for existing state-of-the-art template-free generative approaches to produce an accurate yet diverse set of feasible reactions. In this paper, we model single-step retrosynthesis planning and introduce RETRO SYNFLOW (RSF) a discrete flow-matching framework that builds a Markov bridge between the prescribed target product molecule and the reactant molecule. In contrast to past approaches, RSF employs a reaction center identification step to produce intermediate structures known as synthons as a more informative source distribution for the discrete flow. To further enhance diversity and feasibility of generated samples, we employ Feynman-Kac steering with Sequential Monte Carlo based resampling to steer promising generations at inference using a new reward oracle that relies on a forward-synthesis model. Empirically, we demonstrate \nameshort achieves $60.0 \%$ top-1 accuracy, which outperforms the previous SOTA by $20 \%$. We also substantiate the benefits of steering at inference and demonstrate that FK-steering improves top-$5$ round-trip accuracy by $19 \%$ over prior template-free SOTA methods, all while preserving competitive top-$k$ accuracy results.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.005
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation 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: Methods · Consensus signal: Methods
Teacher disagreement score0.005
Threshold uncertainty score0.015

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.005
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.002
Open science0.0020.001
Research integrity0.0020.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0050.001

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.

Opus teacher head0.044
GPT teacher head0.298
Teacher spread0.254 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

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

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

Citations0
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueArXiv.orgSame topicMachine Learning in Materials ScienceFrench-language works237,207