ReviewChemical science2026
Computational data as the fuel for AI in chemistry.
Review in Chemical science, 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
2 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
The rapid growth of machine learning and generative AI in the chemical sciences has placed increasing demands on the data used to train and evaluate these models. Although algorithmic advances have attracted considerable attention, the quality, consistency, coverage and accessibility of chemical data remain major constraints on AI-driven discovery. This perspective argues that computational data should be regarded not merely as a complement to experimental data, but as deliberately designed, domain-specific infrastructure for chemical AI. This does not require exhaustive coverage of chemical space: the distinctive value of computational methods lies in their ability to generate reproducible, consistently labelled data systematically within selected regions of chemical and configurational space. Through case studies in neural-network potentials and computational peptide design, we examine how the selection, sampling, fidelity and scale of computational datasets define model capabilities and domains of applicability. We then consider how computational and experimental data can be combined, with computation enabling scalable, targeted data generation and experiment providing physical grounding and validation. We conclude by identifying priorities for deliberate dataset design, FAIR data practices and open benchmarking in chemical AI.
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.