Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
Cited by 183

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 1 of the 1 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

ReactionPredictor: Prediction of Complex Chemical Reactions at the Mechanistic Level Using Machine Learning

Kayala, Matthew A., Baldi, Pierre·2012·Journal of Chemical Information and Modeling

Abstract

Proposing reasonable mechanisms and predicting the course of chemical reactions is important to the practice of organic chemistry. Approaches to reaction prediction have historically used obfuscating representations and manually encoded patterns or rules. Here we present ReactionPredictor, a machine learning approach to reaction prediction that models elementary, mechanistic reactions as interactions between approximate molecular orbitals (MOs). A training data set of productive reactions known to occur at reasonable rates and yields and verified by inclusion in the literature or textbooks is derived from an existing rule-based system and expanded upon with manual curation from graduate level textbooks. Using this training data set of complex polar, hypervalent, radical, and pericyclic reactions, a two-stage machine learning prediction framework is trained and validated. In the first stage, filtering models trained at the level of individual MOs are used to reduce the space of possible reactions to consider. In the second stage, ranking models over the filtered space of possible reactions are used to order the reactions such that the productive reactions are the top ranked. The resulting model, ReactionPredictor, perfectly ranks polar reactions 78.1% of the time and recovers all productive reactions 95.7% of the time when allowing for small numbers of errors. Pericyclic and radical reactions are perfectly ranked 85.8% and 77.0% of the time, respectively, rising to >93% recovery for both reaction types with a small number of allowed errors. Decisions about which of the polar, pericyclic, or radical reaction type ranking models to use can be made with >99% accuracy. Finally, for multistep reaction pathways, we implement the first mechanistic pathway predictor using constrained tree-search to discover a set of reasonable mechanistic steps from given reactants to given products. Webserver implementations of both the single step and pathway versions of ReactionPredictor are available via the chemoinformatics portal http://cdb.ics.uci.edu/.

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.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1021/ci3003039

Cites

1 of 1 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

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.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

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

Cites

Cited by

See all 183

Metadata

Authors
Kayala, M. A., & Baldi, P.
Venue
Journal of Chemical Information and Modeling
Published
2012-10-01
Volume
52
Issue
10
Pages
2526-2540
ISSN
  • 1549-9596 (ISSN-L)
  • 1549-960X
OpenAlex
W2066412916
Cited by
183
References
1
FWCI
2.72
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

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.