ArticleJournal of chemical information and modeling2026
Relating Model Performance to Embedding Distributions in Molecular Machine Learning.
Article in Journal of chemical information and modeling, 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
Choosing effective molecular representations remains a central challenge in molecular machine learning and is often addressed through costly trial-and-error. While model selection is typically guided solely by predictive performance, analyzing relationships between trained models can reveal additional structure missed by performance metrics. In terms of model similarity metrics, representational alignment techniques, such as centered kernel alignment (CKA), provide a principled framework for comparing models beyond their predictive performance. In this work, we show that representational alignment is fundamentally linked to performance differences between models. For linear regression, we theoretically show that alignment upper-bounds the achievable performance gaps. This result predicts an exclusion zone in which highly aligned models do not exhibit large performance differences, a phenomenon we empirically validate across 661 classification data sets. To make these insights actionable, we introduce the mean minimum class distance (MMCD), a straightforward data set-level statistic that predicts a data set's position in the alignment-performance difference space. Across 23 molecular representations and ten representative data sets, we find that data sets that produce highly aligned models tend to exhibit low MMCD, suggesting that alignment is strongly shaped by data set-specific structure. Overall, our results indicate that when alignment is low, exploring alternative representations is more likely to improve performance. In contrast, when alignment is high, gains are more effectively achieved by increasing the size of the training data.
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.