ReviewACS engineering Au2026
Predictive Chemical Kinetic Modeling: Where We Succeed, Where We Struggle, and What Comes Next.
Review in ACS engineering Au, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 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
3 citing papers in PubMed.
- Computational and Data-Driven Strategies for Lignocellulosic Biomass Valorization: From Multiscale Modeling to Digitalized Biorefinery Design.Advanced science (Weinheim, Baden-Wurttemberg, Germany) · 2026Review
- Mathematical and Computational Models of Biochemical Reactions and Cell Signaling-From Ordinary Differential Equations to Machine Learning.International journal of molecular sciences · 2026Review
- Article
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
Chemical kinetic modeling plays a foundational role in fields ranging from energy to environmental science, pharmaceuticals, and advanced materials. The past two decades have seen remarkable progress, particularly in modeling gas-phase reactions for thermochemical processes, leading to impactful industrial applications such as steam cracking and air quality management. However, new challenges are emerging. The successful development of systematic methodologies for the description of gas-phase kinetics opens the possibility to apply the same approach to the study of more challenging systems. Here, we review recent advances, including ab initio transition state theory-based master equation estimation of elementary rates, automated mechanism generation, machine-learning-assisted kinetics, and uncertainty quantification, and discuss the advances needed to apply the same methodological approach in areas such as heterogeneous catalysis, electrochemistry, liquid-phase and solid-state reactivity, and multiscale model integration. We advocate for the development of targeted tools, especially methods that go beyond empirical tuning toward first-principles-based predictions. We highlight the need for accessible software and AI-augmented workflows to democratize modeling for industry and academia alike. In this perspective, we call attention to not only what has worked but also what remains unsolved, advocating to avoid overemphasizing successes in scientific works at the expense of realism. The next decade should focus on predictive capability, physical accuracy, and community infrastructure (e.g., databases and services) to enable innovation across diverse fields. We argue that kinetic modeling, properly equipped, can accelerate discovery far beyond its traditional domains.
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.