ArticleJournal of chemical information and modeling2026
Measuring AI Progress in Drug Discovery: A Reproducible Leaderboard for the Tox21 Challenge.
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
6 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Deep learning has fundamentally transformed fields such as computer vision and natural language processing since the early 2010s and has strongly influenced biomedical research. For drug discovery specifically, a key inflection point─akin to vision's "ImageNet moment"─arrived in 2015, when deep neural networks surpassed traditional approaches in the Tox21 Data Challenge. This milestone accelerated the adoption of deep learning methods across the pharmaceutical industry, and today, most major companies have integrated these approaches into their research pipelines. Following the conclusion of the Tox21 Challenge, its data set was incorporated into several established benchmarks, including MoleculeNet and the Open Graph Benchmark. However, during these integrations, the data set was altered, and labels were imputed or manufactured, resulting in a loss of comparability across studies. Consequently, the extent to which bioactivity and toxicity prediction methods have improved over the past decade remains unclear. To this end, we introduce a reproducible leaderboard, hosted on Hugging Face with the original Tox21 Challenge data set, together with a set of baseline and representative methods. The current version of the leaderboard indicates that the original Tox21 winner from 2015─the ensemble-based DeepTox method─and the descriptor-based self-normalizing neural networks introduced in 2017 continue to perform competitively and rank among the top methods for toxicity prediction, raising questions about the extent of progress achieved over the past decade. As part of this work, we provide public access to all baselines and evaluated models for inference via standardized API end points on Hugging Face Spaces.
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.