A PHP Error was encountered

Severity: Warning

Message: file_get_contents(https://...@gmail.com&api_key=61f08fa0b96a73de8c900d749fcb997acc09&a=1): Failed to open stream: HTTP request failed! HTTP/1.1 429 Too Many Requests

Filename: helpers/my_audit_helper.php

Line Number: 176

Backtrace:

File: /var/www/html/application/helpers/my_audit_helper.php
Line: 176
Function: file_get_contents

File: /var/www/html/application/helpers/my_audit_helper.php
Line: 250
Function: simplexml_load_file_from_url

File: /var/www/html/application/helpers/my_audit_helper.php
Line: 1034
Function: getPubMedXML

File: /var/www/html/application/helpers/my_audit_helper.php
Line: 3152
Function: GetPubMedArticleOutput_2016

File: /var/www/html/application/controllers/Detail.php
Line: 575
Function: pubMedSearch_Global

File: /var/www/html/application/controllers/Detail.php
Line: 489
Function: pubMedGetRelatedKeyword

File: /var/www/html/index.php
Line: 316
Function: require_once

The challenge of balancing model sensitivity and robustness in predicting yields: a benchmarking study of amide coupling reactions. | LitMetric

Accurate prediction of reaction yield is the holy grail for computer-assisted synthesis prediction, but current models have failed to generalize to large literature datasets. To understand the causes and inspire future design, we systematically benchmarked the yield prediction task. We carefully curated and augmented a literature dataset of 41 239 amide coupling reactions, each with information on reactants, products, intermediates, yields, and reaction contexts, and provided 3D structures for the molecules. We calculated molecular features related to 2D and 3D structure information, as well as physical and electronic properties. These descriptors were paired with 4 categories of machine learning methods (linear, kernel, ensemble, and neural network), yielding valuable benchmarks about feature and model performance. Despite the excellent performance on a high-throughput experiment (HTE) dataset ( around 0.9), no method gave satisfactory results on the literature data. The best performance was an of 0.395 ± 0.020 using the stack technique. Error analysis revealed that and are among the main reasons for incorrect predictions. Removing reactivity cliffs and uncertain reactions boosted the to 0.457 ± 0.006. These results highlight that yield prediction models must be sensitive to the reactivity change due to the subtle structure variance, as well as be robust to the uncertainty associated with yield measurements.

Download full-text PDF

Source
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC10566507PMC
http://dx.doi.org/10.1039/d3sc03902aDOI Listing

Publication Analysis

Top Keywords

amide coupling
8
coupling reactions
8
yield prediction
8
challenge balancing
4
balancing model
4
model sensitivity
4
sensitivity robustness
4
robustness predicting
4
predicting yields
4
yields benchmarking
4

Similar Publications

Want AI Summaries of new PubMed Abstracts delivered to your In-box?

Enter search terms and have AI summaries delivered each week - change queries or unsubscribe any time!