ArticleJournal of cheminformatics2024
Evaluating the generalizability of graph neural networks for predicting collision cross section.
Article in Journal of cheminformatics, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- Defining the limits of plant chemical space: challenges and estimations.GigaScience · 2025Article
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
Ion Mobility coupled with Mass Spectrometry (IM-MS) is a promising analytical technique that enhances molecular characterization by measuring collision cross-section (CCS) values, which are indicative of the molecular size and shape. However, the effective application of CCS values in structural analysis is still constrained by the limited availability of experimental data, necessitating the development of accurate machine learning (ML) models for in silico predictions. In this study, we evaluated state-of-the-art Graph Neural Networks (GNNs), trained to predict CCS values using the largest publicly available dataset to date. Although our results confirm the high accuracy of these models within chemical spaces similar to their training environments, their performance significantly declines when applied to structurally novel regions. This discrepancy raises concerns about the reliability of in silico CCS predictions and underscores the need for releasing further publicly available CCS datasets. To mitigate this, we introduce Mol2CCS which demonstrates how generalization can be partially improved by extending models to account for additional features such as molecular fingerprints, descriptors, and the molecule types. Lastly, we also show how confidence models can support by enhancing the reliability of the CCS estimates.Scientific contributionWe have benchmarked state-of-the-art graph neural networks for predicting collision cross section. Our work highlights the accuracy of these models when trained and predicted in similar chemical spaces, but also how their accuracy drops when evaluated in structurally novel regions. Lastly, we conclude by presenting potential approaches to mitigate this issue.
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.