Evidence map›Paper›PMID 42258020›Full record

ArticleJournal of computer-aided molecular design2026

A round-robin exercise for the precise prediction of aqueous solubility of organic chemicals using chemometric, machine learning, and stacking ensemble of deep learning models.

Arkaprava Banerjee, Vinay Kumar, Shubha Das, Prodipta Bhattacharyya, Probir Kumar Ojha, Indrasis Dasgupta, Shovanlal Gayen, Yogendra Chandra, Partha Pratim Roy, Siyun Yang and 5 more

Abstract read
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in Journal of computer-aided molecular design, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
1citing 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

1 citing paper in PubMed.

  1. 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

15 authors.

Arkaprava BanerjeeDrug Theoretics and Cheminformatics Laboratory (DTC Lab), Department of Pharmaceutical Technology, Jadavpur University, Kolkata, 700032, India.ORCID 0000-0001-8468-0784
Vinay KumarDrug Theoretics and Cheminformatics Laboratory (DTC Lab), Department of Pharmaceutical Technology, Jadavpur University, Kolkata, 700032, India.ORCID 0000-0002-6809-7633
Shubha DasDrug Discovery and Development Laboratory (DDD Lab), Department of Pharmaceutical Technology, Jadavpur University, Kolkata, 700032, India.ORCID 0009-0004-1596-8900
Prodipta BhattacharyyaDrug Discovery and Development Laboratory (DDD Lab), Department of Pharmaceutical Technology, Jadavpur University, Kolkata, 700032, India.ORCID 0009-0000-2211-4795
Probir Kumar OjhaDrug Discovery and Development Laboratory (DDD Lab), Department of Pharmaceutical Technology, Jadavpur University, Kolkata, 700032, India.ORCID 0000-0003-4796-3915
Indrasis DasguptaLaboratory of Drug Design and Discovery (LabD3), Department of Pharmaceutical Technology, Jadavpur University, Kolkata, 700032, India.ORCID 0009-0006-3780-3466
Shovanlal GayenLaboratory of Drug Design and Discovery (LabD3), Department of Pharmaceutical Technology, Jadavpur University, Kolkata, 700032, India.ORCID 0000-0002-3367-578X
Yogendra ChandraLaboratory of Drug Discovery and Ecotoxicology (DDET Lab), Department of Pharmacy, Guru Ghasidas Vishwavidyalaya (A Central University), Bilaspur, 495009, India.ORCID 0009-0003-6344-168X
Partha Pratim RoyLaboratory of Drug Discovery and Ecotoxicology (DDET Lab), Department of Pharmacy, Guru Ghasidas Vishwavidyalaya (A Central University), Bilaspur, 495009, India.ORCID 0000-0003-2357-3234
Siyun YangChemometrics and Molecular Modeling Laboratory (CMM Lab), Department of Chemistry and Physics, Kean University, 1000 Morris Avenue, Union, NJ, 07083, USA.ORCID 0009-0007-9073-8437
Lu LiChemometrics and Molecular Modeling Laboratory (CMM Lab), Department of Chemistry and Physics, Kean University, 1000 Morris Avenue, Union, NJ, 07083, USA.ORCID 0009-0003-1603-6825
Supratik KarChemometrics and Molecular Modeling Laboratory (CMM Lab), Department of Chemistry and Physics, Kean University, 1000 Morris Avenue, Union, NJ, 07083, USA.ORCID 0000-0002-9411-2091
Jyotsna Bhat-AmbureMultiTargetAI JPS LLP (MTAI), Pune, 411015, India.ORCID 0000-0002-1500-7040
Pravin AmbureMultiTargetAI JPS LLP (MTAI), Pune, 411015, India.ORCID 0000-0001-7244-7117
Kunal RoyDrug Theoretics and Cheminformatics Laboratory (DTC Lab), Department of Pharmaceutical Technology, Jadavpur University, Kolkata, 700032, India. kunal.roy@jadavpuruniversity.in.ORCID 0000-0003-4486-8074

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Aqueous solubility is an important property for assessing the druggability and ecotoxicological effects of molecules. Successful drug candidates should have optimal aqueous solubility to improve bioavailability to target tissues. To effectively screen molecules in a short period of time, reliable predictive models are highly useful. In the present study, we conducted a round-robin exercise using a large, curated dataset of over 6000 compounds to predict aqueous solubility quantitatively. The six participating groups used an array of Machine Learning and Deep Learning algorithms to develop models with strong robustness and external predictive performance. All the models underwent rigorous Leave-One-Out and tenfold cross-validation. The diversity of training sets and descriptor types used by different groups paved the way for exploring the mechanistic basis for the efficient identification of contributing features. The best-performing model was selected using the statistical Sum of Ranking Differences (SRD) approach, considering the performances on training, cross-validation, and test, as well as the performance difference between the training and test sets. Additionally, a curated, true external set was screened by the six different models. Here, the best-performing model was selected using a consensus ranking strategy based on Mean Absolute Error (MAE), Root Mean Squared Error (RMSE), and [Formula: see text]. In both approaches, i.e., the inherent model performance in terms of training, test, and cross-validation statistics, and the ability of the model to efficiently predict true external data, the Stacking Ensemble of Deep q-RASPR models emerged as the winner. This model showed comparable predictive performance to the previously reported model, which apparently lacked a proper data curation workflow and contained a significant number of duplicates and mixtures in its dataset, which can inflate model statistics. The insights from the different feature contributions from the different groups identified the useful structural and physicochemical aspects, which can help synthetic chemists to optimize molecules.

Indexed as

Deep LearningMachine LearningOrganic ChemicalsAlgorithmsEnsemble LearningPrediction AlgorithmsPredictive Learning ModelsSolubilityWaterOrganic ChemicalsWaterDeep learningMachine learningq-RASPRQSPRRound robinSolubility

Identifiers

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
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.