ArticleRSC advances2026
Out-of-distribution evaluation of active learning pipelines for molecular property prediction.
Article in RSC advances, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Active learning (AL) has been widely applied as a strategy to reduce the data requirements of training machine learning models. Such a strategy can be especially valuable in fields where data collection is costly or time-consuming, as is the case for molecular property data. In this study, we evaluate AL for molecular property prediction, focusing on the performance on out-of-distribution (OOD) data. This OOD evaluation framework mimics the scenario found in real-world applications but is understudied in the prior literature. In our study, we focus on the prediction of solvation energy from molecular structure and develop an AL framework based on prediction uncertainties derived from Evidential Deep Learning (EDL). We started by training our model on an in-distribution training dataset and progressively augmented it with molecules from an OOD dataset sampled from PubChem, selected either randomly or using the AL strategy. We further examined generalization capabilities of AL by beginning with a subset of the in-distribution dataset, intentionally chosen to reduce initial diversity. Our results indicate that EDL demonstrates an advantage over random sampling. To further understand the behavior of the AL algorithm, we performed analysis of how the similarity between the training dataset and the held-out dataset affects the AL performance and of the distributional differences in the types of molecules selected by random sampling and AL.
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.