PreprintCited by 133Various Chemistry Research TopicsRobotics and Automated SystemsMachine Learning in Materials Science

ORGANA: A Robotic Assistant for Automated Chemistry Experimentation and Characterization

Open access
Darvish, Kourosh, Skreta, Marta, Zhao, Yuchi, Yoshikawa, Naruki, Som, Sagnik, Bogdanovic, Miroslav, Cao, Yang, Hao, Han +4 more·2024·arXiv

Abstract

Chemistry experiments can be resource- and labor-intensive, often requiring manual tasks like polishing electrodes in electrochemistry. Traditional lab automation infrastructure faces challenges adapting to new experiments. To address this, we introduce ORGANA, an assistive robotic system that automates diverse chemistry experiments using decision-making and perception tools. It makes decisions with chemists in the loop to control robots and lab devices. ORGANA interacts with chemists using Large Language Models (LLMs) to derive experiment goals, handle disambiguation, and provide experiment logs. ORGANA plans and executes complex tasks with visual feedback, while supporting scheduling and parallel task execution. We demonstrate ORGANA's capabilities in solubility, pH measurement, recrystallization, and electrochemistry experiments. In electrochemistry, it executes a 19-step plan in parallel to characterize quinone derivatives for flow batteries. Our user study shows ORGANA reduces frustration and physical demand by over 50%, with users saving an average of 80.3% of their time when using it.

Integrity signals

Registry

DataCite · 10.48550/arxiv.2401.06949

Cites

1 of 1 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Claims the paper makes

We couldn’t retrieve this paper’s full text, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

  • Organa achieved results comparable to human chemists while reducing execution time by over 20% in electrochemistry.

    “In electrochemistry, it demonstrated the automation of complex processes, such as electrode polishing and redox potential measurement, achieving results comparable to human chemists while reducing execution time by over 20%.”

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Darvish, K., Skreta, M., Zhao, Y., Yoshikawa, N., Som, S., Bogdanovic, M., Cao, Y., Hao, H., Xu, H., Aspuru-Guzik, A., Garg, A., & Shkurti, F.
Affiliations
  • University of Toronto (CA)
  • Georgia Institute of Technology (US)
Corresponding author
Darvish, Kourosh
Venue
arXiv
Publisher
arXiv
Published
2024
Volume
8
Issue
2
Pages
101897-101897
ISSN
2590-2385 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W4404266811
Cited by
133
References
1
Citations by year
2026: 62 · 2025: 56 · 2024: 15
FWCI
28.39
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • Matter (publishedVersion)
  • arXiv (Cornell University) (submittedVersion)
  • arXiv (Cornell University)
Funders
  • University of Toronto (CFREF-2022-00042)
  • Canada First Research Excellence Fund (2022-00042, CFREF-2022-00042)
  • Vector Institute
  • Natural Resources Canada
Topics
  • Physical Sciences › Chemistry › Physical and Theoretical Chemistry › Various Chemistry Research Topics
  • Physical Sciences › Engineering › Control and Systems Engineering › Robotics and Automated Systems
  • Physical Sciences › Materials Science › Materials Chemistry › Machine Learning in Materials Science
Keywords
large language models, human-in-the-loop control, electrode polishing, electrochemistry, solubility measurement, pH measurement, recrystallization, flow batteries, quinone derivatives, task planning, parallel task execution, user study

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