2019
DOI: 10.48550/arxiv.1910.09688
|View full text |Cite
Preprint
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Learning to Make Generalizable and Diverse Predictions for Retrosynthesis

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
3
1
1

Citation Types

0
35
0

Year Published

2021
2021
2022
2022

Publication Types

Select...
5
1

Relationship

0
6

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 24 publications
(35 citation statements)
references
References 18 publications
0
35
0
Order By: Relevance
“…18,41,57 However, they have been shown to make some trivial mistakes 51 and produce reactions with a limited diversity. 40 These models also act as black-boxes; they do not provide the reasoning behind their predictions and are not able to map atoms between the substrates and the product.…”
Section: ■ Related Workmentioning
confidence: 99%
See 1 more Smart Citation
“…18,41,57 However, they have been shown to make some trivial mistakes 51 and produce reactions with a limited diversity. 40 These models also act as black-boxes; they do not provide the reasoning behind their predictions and are not able to map atoms between the substrates and the product.…”
Section: ■ Related Workmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Despite the added flexibility and the resulting better coverage of the chemical space, current applications of generative modeling tends to result in a limited set of plausible chemical reactions for a given input. 40 Models such as proposed in Schwaller et al, 17 Karpov et al, 18 Zheng et al 41 belong to the class of sequence to sequence models. They generate a chemical reaction by sequentially outputting individual symbols in the SMILES notation.…”
Section: ■ Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Baselines Template-based GLN (Dai et al, 2019), templatefree G2G (Shi et al, 2020) and RetroXpert (Yan et al, 2020) are primary baselines, which not only achieve state-of-theart performance, but also provide open-source PyTorch code that allows us to verify their effectiveness. To show broad superiority, we also comapre SemiRetro with other baselines, incuding RetroSim (Coley et al, 2017b), NeuralSym (Segler & Waller, 2017), SCROP (Zheng et al, 2019), LV-Transformer (Chen et al, 2019), GraphRetro (Somnath et al, 2021), MEGAN (Sacha et al, 2021), MHNreact (Seidl et al, 2021), and Dual model (Sun et al, 2020). As the retrosynthesis task is quite complex, subtle implementation differences or mistakes may cause critical performance fluctuations.…”
Section: Basic Settingmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…22−25 Although template-free models do not require any chemical prior knowledge or reaction templates and exhibit comparable or better accuracy than template-based models, they are likely to provide dissatisfactory results owing to the three types of problems depicted in Figure 1 predicted reactant text representation (candidate 1 in Figure 1) has a grammatical error and cannot be converted into a molecular structure, 21,23 (ii) implausibility: the prediction (candidate 2 in the Figure 1) is grammatically valid but cannot synthesize the desired product, 21 and (iii) lack of diversity: some of the predicted reactant candidates (candidates 3 and 4 in Figure 1) are duplicated, thereby possibly lowering the number of unique suggestions. 24,27 Most of the retrosynthesis studies evaluate the precursor predictions in terms of accuracy, but grammatical validity, chemical plausibility, and diversity are also important. Expanding to multistep retrosynthesis planning, diversity acts as a more important performance indicator than accuracy.…”
Section: ■ Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…27 To solve the three problems, attempts have been made, such as adding a syntax corrector that can fix a grammatical error in the retrosynthetic prediction 23 or mixture modeling for diversity. 24 However, no studies have tackled all these problems simultaneously.…”
Section: ■ Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%