ArticleJournal of chemical information and modeling2021
Materials Precursor Score: Modeling Chemists' Intuition for the Synthetic Accessibility of Porous Organic Cage Precursors.
Article in Journal of chemical information and modeling, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 9 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
9 citing papers in PubMed.
- Cross-disciplinary perspectives on the potential for artificial intelligence across chemistry.Chemical Society reviews · 2025Review
- Data-Driven Search Algorithm for Discovery of Synthesizable Zeolitic Imidazolate Frameworks.JACS Au · 2025Article
- Streamlining the automated discovery of porous organic cages.Chemical science · 2024Article
- Extracting medicinal chemistry intuition via preference machine learning.Nature communications · 2023Article
- Article
- Computational modeling to assist in the discovery of supramolecular materials.Annals of the New York Academy of Sciences · 2022Review
- Coarse-grained modelling to predict the packing of porous organic cages.Chemical science · 2022Article
- Unlocking the computational design of metal-organic cages.Chemical communications (Cambridge, England) · 2022Review
- Rigidity and Flexibility in Rotaxanes and Their Relatives; On Being Stubborn and Easy-Going.Frontiers in chemistry · 2022Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Computation is increasingly being used to try to accelerate the discovery of new materials. One specific example of this is porous molecular materials, specifically porous organic cages, where the porosity of the materials predominantly comes from the internal cavities of the molecules themselves. The computational discovery of novel structures with useful properties is currently hindered by the difficulty in transitioning from a computational prediction to synthetic realization. Attempts at experimental validation are often time-consuming, expensive, and frequently, the key bottleneck of material discovery. In this work, we developed a computational screening workflow for porous molecules that includes consideration of the synthetic difficulty of material precursors, aimed at easing the transition between computational prediction and experimental realization. We trained a machine learning model by first collecting data on 12,553 molecules categorized either as "easy-to-synthesize" or "difficult-to-synthesize" by expert chemists with years of experience in organic synthesis. We used an approach to address the class imbalance present in our data set, producing a binary classifier able to categorize easy-to-synthesize molecules with few false positives. We then used our model during computational screening for porous organic molecules to bias toward precursors whose easier synthesis requirements would make them promising candidates for experimental realization and material development. We found that even by limiting precursors to those that are easier-to-synthesize, we are still able to identify cages with favorable, and even some rare, properties.
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.