The DOI matches its Crossref record.
CAVEAT: A program to facilitate the design of organic molecules
Overview
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
Citations
Cited by
Classification of scaffold-hopping approaches
Sun, H., Tawa, G., & Wallqvist, A. (2012) · Drug Discovery Today · doi:10.1016/j.drudis.2011.10.024 · Cited by 375
Recent Advances in Scaffold Hopping: Miniperspective
Hu, Y., Stumpfe, D., & Bajorath, J. (2017) · Journal of Medicinal Chemistry · doi:10.1021/acs.jmedchem.6b01437 · Cited by 361
Fragment-Based Lead Discovery and Design
Joseph-McCarthy, D., Campbell, A. J., Kern, G., & Moustakas, D. (2014) · Journal of Chemical Information and Modeling · doi:10.1021/ci400731w · Cited by 129
Fragment Informatics and Computational Fragment‐Based Drug Design: An Overview and Update
Sheng, C., & Zhang, W. (2013) · Medicinal Research Reviews · doi:10.1002/med.21255 · Cited by 80
Metadata
- Authors
- Lauri, G., & Bartlett, P. A.
- Venue
- Journal of Computer-Aided Molecular Design
- Published
- 1994-02
- Volume
- 8
- Issue
- 1
- Pages
- 51-66
- ISSN
- 0920-654X (ISSN-L)
- 1573-4951
- OpenAlex
- W2035349592
- Cited by
- 266
- References
- 0
- FWCI
- 23.28
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review
How to cite
Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.
- This page
- CoChat. (2026). Citation check: CAVEAT: A program to facilitate the design of organic molecules. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1007/bf00124349
- The paper
- Lauri, G., & Bartlett, P. A. (1994). CAVEAT: A program to facilitate the design of organic molecules. Journal of Computer-Aided Molecular Design. https://doi.org/10.1007/bf00124349
Data sources
Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.
Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).
Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.
