Evidence map›Paper›PMID 38499581›Full record

ArticleScientific data2024

Will we ever be able to accurately predict solubility?

P Llompart, C Minoletti, S Baybekov, D Horvath, G Marcou, A Varnek

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Scientific data, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 23 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
23citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

23 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Data-Driven Critical Evaluation of the General Solubility Equation.Journal of chemical information and modeling · 2026
    Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Review
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

6 authors.

P LlompartLaboratory of Chemoinformatics, UMR7140, University of Strasbourg, Strasbourg, France.
C MinolettiIDD/CADD, Sanofi, Vitry-Sur-Seine, France.
S BaybekovLaboratory of Chemoinformatics, UMR7140, University of Strasbourg, Strasbourg, France.
D HorvathLaboratory of Chemoinformatics, UMR7140, University of Strasbourg, Strasbourg, France.
G MarcouLaboratory of Chemoinformatics, UMR7140, University of Strasbourg, Strasbourg, France. g.marcou@unistra.fr.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0003-1676-6708
A VarnekLaboratory of Chemoinformatics, UMR7140, University of Strasbourg, Strasbourg, France.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0003-1886-925X

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Accurate prediction of thermodynamic solubility by machine learning remains a challenge. Recent models often display good performances, but their reliability may be deceiving when used prospectively. This study investigates the origins of these discrepancies, following three directions: a historical perspective, an analysis of the aqueous solubility dataverse and data quality. We investigated over 20 years of published solubility datasets and models, highlighting overlooked datasets and the overlaps between popular sets. We benchmarked recently published models on a novel curated solubility dataset and report poor performances. We also propose a workflow to cure aqueous solubility data aiming at producing useful models for bench chemist. Our results demonstrate that some state-of-the-art models are not ready for public usage because they lack a well-defined applicability domain and overlook historical data sources. We report the impact of factors influencing the utility of the models: interlaboratory standard deviation, ionic state of the solute and data sources. The herein obtained models, and quality-assessed datasets are publicly available.

Identifiers

PMID38499581
PMCPMC10948805

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.