Evidence Hub

In Silico Chemical Experiments in the Age of AI: From Quantum Chemistry to Machine Learning and Back

Abdulrahman Aldossary, Jorge A. Campos-Gonzalez-Angulo, Sergio Pablo-García, Shi Xuan Leong, Ella M Rajaonson, Luca A. Thiede, Gary Tom, Andrew Wang et al.

Advances in Materials, 2024

74 citations

Abstract

Computational chemistry is an indispensable tool for understanding molecules and predicting chemical properties. However, traditional computational methods face significant challenges due to the difficulty of solving the Schrödinger equations and the increasing computational cost with the size of the molecular system. In response, there has been a surge of interest in leveraging artificial intelligence (AI) and machine learning (ML) techniques to in silico experiments. Integrating AI and ML into computational chemistry offers solutions to scalability and accelerating the exploration of chemical space. However, challenges remain, particularly regarding the reproducibility and transferability of ML models. This review highlights the evolution of ML in learning from, complementing, or replacing traditional computational chemistry for energy and property predictions. Starting from models trained entirely on numerical data, a journey set forth toward the ideal model incorporating or learning the physical laws of quantum mechanics. Through a review of existing computational methods, ML models, and their intertwining, this paper also outlines a roadmap for future research, identifying areas for improvement and innovation. Ultimately, the goal is to develop AI architectures capable of predicting accurate and transferable solutions to the Schrödinger equation, thereby revolutionizing in silico experiments within chemistry and materials science.

How strong is the evidence?

Evidence Hub reads this as a review, done in computer models (in silico), not in people. Its evidence level is 5 of 5 (Very low · case / narrative / animal / in vitro / in silico). Case reports, narrative reviews, and animal, cell or computer-model studies give the weakest evidence for human health.

How the five levels of evidence work. The level is assigned automatically from the abstract and can be wrong, so check the paper.

Read the paper

Related studies

Go deeper in Evidence Hub

Evidence Hub adds a study data sheet (design, sample size, evidence level, key numbers), an AI summary and a chat grounded in the paper's text.

Open this study Sign up free