ArticleJournal of chemical information and modeling2026
Librarian of Alexandria: A Modular Chemical Data Extraction Pipeline to Compare LLM Performance.
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
Abstract
Dataset creation is a critical component of predictive machine learning technology. In the field of chemistry, large experimental datasets are scarce, especially for niche chemical properties and topics, and their creation is cumbersome and time-consuming when performed manually. Here, we present Librarian of Alexandria (LoA), an open-source and lightweight framework for testing large-language models (LLMs) on the task of generating large datasets via direct extraction from scientific literature. LoA is available on GitHub along with example inputs, outputs, Docker container, and a Colab-friendly Jupyter Notebook. LoA has the chosen LLM(s) check the relevance of a research paper and perform data extraction. Two separate or identical LLMs may be independently and modularly specified by the end-user for these separate tasks. LoA can be easily updated via simplified user incorporation of the latest available LLMs. We compare several LLMs for both relevance and extraction functions and automate the collection of research papers for several popular chemical journals providing open access. LoA provides a much-needed testing environment which can be used to develop LLMs capable of assembling enormous chemical datasets with minimal effort on the part of the scientist. The best models we were able to test achieved ∼95% accuracy, which is sufficient for the purposes of training predictive machine learning models.
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.