ArticleJournal of chemical information and modeling2019
Intuition-Enabled Machine Learning Beats the Competition When Joint Human-Robot Teams Perform Inorganic Chemical Experiments.
Article in Journal of chemical information and modeling, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 7 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
7 citing papers in PubMed.
- SPACESHIP: Autonomous Mapping of Hardware-Dependent Synthesizable Space in Solution-Phase Gold Nanomaterials.Journal of the American Chemical Society · 2026Article
- The Alchemist, the Scientist, and the Robot: Exploring the Potential of Human-AI Symbiosis in Self-Driving Polymer Laboratories.Macromolecular rapid communications · 2025Review
- Data-Driven Polyoxometalate Chemistry.Chemistry (Weinheim an der Bergstrasse, Germany) · 2025Article
- Robotic Modules for the Programmable Chemputation of Molecules and Materials.ACS central science · 2023Review
- Data-driven design of molecular nanomagnets.Nature communications · 2022Article
- The case for data science in experimental chemistry: examples and recommendations.Nature reviews. Chemistry · 2022Review
- Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
8 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Traditionally, chemists have relied on years of training and accumulated experience in order to discover new molecules. But the space of possible molecules is so vast that only a limited exploration with the traditional methods can be ever possible. This means that many opportunities for the discovery of interesting phenomena have been missed, and in addition, the inherent variability of these phenomena can make them difficult to control and understand. The current state-of-the-art is moving toward the development of automated and eventually fully autonomous systems coupled with in-line analytics and decision-making algorithms. Yet even these, despite the substantial progress achieved recently, still cannot easily tackle large combinatorial spaces, as they are limited by the lack of high-quality data. Herein, we explore the utility of active learning methods for exploring the chemical space by comparing the collaboration between human experimenters with an algorithm-based search against their performance individually to probe the self-assembly and crystallization of the polyoxometalate cluster Na
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.