ArticleJournal of molecular modeling2026
Machine learning-assisted high-throughput virtual screening of novel energetic materials.
Article in Journal of molecular 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
9 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
contextHigh-energy density materials (HEDMs) are indispensable for defense and a wide range of industrial applications. A core challenge in their development is achieving an optimal balance between high energy performance and low mechanical sensitivity. Traditional design approaches suffer from low efficiency, high cost, and potential risks. In this work, we propose an integrated strategy combining density functional theory (DFT) and machine learning (ML) to address these issues. Using 4-(1,5-diamino-1H-1,2,4-triazol-3-yl)-3-(4,5-diamino-1H-1,2,4-triazol-3-yl)-1H-pyrazole as the parent scaffold, we constructed a molecular library of over 10,000 derivatives. A total of 439 representative molecules were selected for property calculation, and five ML algorithms were evaluated. The XGBoost model showed the best predictive performance, with an average test set R
methodsAll quantum chemical calculations were performed at the B3LYP/6-31+G(d,p) level using Gaussian 16. Ten key properties were obtained, including heat of detonation (Q), detonation velocity (D), detonation pressure (P), impact sensitivity (H₅₀), gaseous and solid enthalpies of formation (HOFg, HOFs), enthalpy of sublimation (ΔHsub), density (ρ), oxygen balance (OB₁₀₀), and nitrogen content (N). Five machine learning algorithms-Random Forest (RF), XGBoost, K-Nearest Neighbors (KNN), Support Vector Machine (SVM), and Decision Tree (DT)-were assessed using five-fold cross-validation. The optimized XGBoost model was used for high-throughput virtual screening of the entire molecular library, and all top candidates were further validated using the same DFT approach.
Indexed as
Identifiers
42307789What 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.