ArticleAlgorithms for molecular biology : AMB2026
Extension of partial atom-to-atom maps: uniqueness and algorithms.
Article in Algorithms for molecular biology : AMB, 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
3 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Chemical reaction databases typically report the molecular structures of reactant and product compounds, as well as their stoichiometry, but lack information, in particular, on the correspondence of reactant and product atoms. These atom-to-atom maps (AAM), however, are crucial for applications including chemical synthesis planning in organic chemistry and the analysis of isotope labeling experiments in modern metabolomics. AAMs therefore need to be reconstructed computationally. This situation is aggravated, furthermore, by the fact that chemically correct AAMs are, fundamentally, determined by quantum-mechanical phenomena and thus cannot be reliably computed by solving graph-theoretical optimization problems defined by the reactant and product structures. A viable solution for this problem is to shift the focus into first identifying a partial AAM containing the reaction center, i.e., covering the atoms incident with all bonds that change during a reaction. This then leads to the problem of extending the partial map to the full reaction. The AAM of a reaction is faithfully represented by the Imaginary Transition State (ITS) graph, providing a convenient graph-theoretic framework to address the questions of when and how a partial AAM can be extended. We show that an unique extension exists whenever, and only if, these partial AAMs cover the reaction center. Moreover, uniqueness results are generalized to partial AAMs in situations where hydrogen atoms are not represented explicitly. In this case their extension can be computed by solving a constrained graph-isomorphism search between specific subgraphs of ITS graphs. We close by benchmarking different tools for this task.
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.