Pith. sign in

REVIEW 3 major objections 5 minor 53 references

Reimagining Target-Aware Molecular Generation through Retrieval-Enhanced Aligned Diffusion

T0 review · 3 major / 5 minor · reviewed 2026-08-07 · deepseek-v4-flash

Challenge this review Re-run · record.json Download PDF Read on arXiv ↗

Pith's one-line read A retrieval-enhanced aligned diffusion model, READ, claims the top rank in pocket-conditioned ligand generation by steering each reverse-diffusion step with pocket-matched scaffolds.

desk verdict A plausible retrieval+diffusion system whose headline Rank-1 result is undercut by an unexamined template-leakage risk and a couple of overclaims. read the letter →

arxiv 2506.14488 v1 pith:M7HIKOWU submitted 2025-06-17 q-bio.BM cs.LG

Dong Xu , Zhangfan Yang , Ka-chun Wong , Zexuan Zhu , Jiangqiang Li , Junkai Ji This is my paper
classification q-bio.BMcs.LG
keywords retrieval-augmentedgenerationdiffusionmodelmolecularstructure-baseddrugdesignSE(3)equivariancelatentrepresentationalignmentpocket-conditionedligandCBGBench
verification ladder T0 review T1 audit T2 compute T3 formal

The pith

A machine-rendered reading of the paper's core claim, the machinery that carries it, and where it could break.

The reading

The paper tries to establish that the long-standing trade-off in structure-based drug design — geometric fit to a protein pocket versus chemical validity and synthetic accessibility — can be resolved by coupling a diffusion generator with retrieved chemical priors. It introduces READ, a retrieval-enhanced aligned diffusion model: a contrastively pretrained encoder maps molecules into a drug-like latent space, and at inference a pocket-ligand similarity graph retrieves scaffold embeddings that steer every reverse-diffusion step. On the CBGBench benchmark, READ is reported to achieve the strongest mean docking energy and the largest percentage binding gap among twelve baselines, reaching Rank 1 while producing valid, diverse ligands that often dock better than the native crystal binder. If correct, this would mean retrieval and diffusion can be co-optimized so that real-world chemical knowledge is injected exactly where generative models tend to fail, without post-hoc fixes.

What carries the argument

The load-bearing mechanism is the coupling of three components: a contrastively pretrained SE(3)-equivariant (rotation- and translation-covariant) encoder that maps molecules into a drug-like latent space, trained on six million MMFF-optimized ZINC molecules with coordinate and masking augmentations; a pocket-ligand bipartite graph whose pocket-pocket edges are weighted by the average of TM-align and DaliLite structural similarity and queried by a coarse-to-fine MSA-then-neighbors routine; and a dual-space diffusion process over atomic coordinates and atom types whose hidden states are aligned layer-wise to the retrieved ligand embeddings through an InfoNCE-style objective. The alignment loss is what makes retrieval effective: the ablation shows that adding the same retrieval signal to an unaligned diffusion backbone degrades the raw Vina score, whereas after alignment it expands the binding gap by roughly an order of magnitude.

What would settle it

Rebuild the retrieval graph after deleting every training pocket whose structural similarity to a test pocket exceeds a threshold such as a TM-score of 0.7, and re-run the CBGBench evaluation; if READ's docking and binding-gap advantages largely vanish, template leakage rather than generative generalization explains the results.

Watch

Extended reading notes

Core claim

READ is, to the authors' knowledge, the first retrieval-augmented diffusion framework for de novo ligand design. Its central claim is that a contrastively pretrained SE(3)-equivariant encoder defines a drug-like latent manifold in which chemical validity is already encoded, and that aligning the diffusion model's layer-wise hidden states to embeddings retrieved from this manifold lets real-world chemical priors guide each reverse-diffusion step. On the CBGBench benchmark the authors report that the 2000-step variant READ-2k achieves the strongest mean dock energy and the largest percentage binding gap, ranks first among twelve baselines, and improves docking over the native ligand on roughly 97% of pockets with mean Vina reductions near 3 kcal/mol.

Load-bearing premise

The evaluation assumes the training pockets used to build the retrieval graph are not already near-duplicates of the test pockets, because if they were, the reported improvements over native ligands could come from retrieving near-native templates rather than from the model learning to generate.

Editorial extensions

If this is right

  • Pocket-conditioned generation can reach top benchmark rank without handcrafted validity filters; contrastive pretraining alone embeds chemical validity into the latent manifold.
  • Retrieval guidance is only beneficial after the diffusion backbone has been aligned to the pretrained latent space; on an unaligned backbone, the same retrieval signal degrades the raw Vina score.
  • Combining alignment with retrieval expands the mean percentage binding gap by roughly an order of magnitude relative to either component alone.
  • READ improves the docking energy over the native reference on roughly 97% of CBGBench pockets, with mean reductions around 3 kcal/mol in Score, Minimize, and Dock modes.
  • The guidance signal compounds with longer denoising schedules, making the 2000-step READ variant the strongest model in the benchmark.

Reading between the lines

Editorial extensions of the paper, not claims the author makes directly.

  • An implication the paper leaves implicit is that the docking improvements should shrink as the 166,000-ligand retrieval library is made smaller; ablating library size would directly test whether retrieval diversity drives the gain.
  • The same recipe of latent alignment plus pocket-similarity retrieval should transfer to other 3D generation tasks such as linker design or fragment elaboration, since the guidance term only requires a pretrained encoder and a pocket-ligand graph.
  • The ablation predicts that applying READ's retrieval guidance to an off-the-shelf diffusion model with an unaligned latent space would hurt, not help, binding scores; this is a direct, checkable consequence of the paper's two-component argument.
  • Because top-1 selection across 100 generated samples drives the per-pocket improvement probabilities, a learned reranker on top of READ's candidates is a promising way to preserve those gains at a smaller sampling budget.
Share X Bluesky LinkedIn Reddit HN

Editorial analysis

A structured set of objections, weighed in public.

Desk editor's note, referee report, and a circularity audit.

Referee Report

3 major / 5 minor

Summary. The manuscript introduces READ, a retrieval-enhanced SE(3)-equivariant diffusion model for pocket-conditioned de novo ligand generation. A contrastive encoder pretrained on six million ZINC molecules defines a latent chemical space; at inference, a pocket-ligand graph built from the CBGBench training split is queried with TM-align and DaliLite, and the top-4 retrieved ligand embeddings are injected into the denoiser at every reverse-diffusion step. The model is evaluated on CBGBench against twelve baselines using AutoDock Vina scores, PLIP interaction fidelity, validity, and substructure statistics. The authors claim that READ-2k achieves Rank 1 in the benchmark, surpasses native ligands for most pockets, and that retrieval and diffusion are co-optimized.

Significance. If the reported gains are genuine, the combination of contrastive latent alignment with pocket-matched retrieval is a useful and timely contribution to structure-based drug design, and the paper gives a reasonably detailed account of the method and ablations. The work is one of relatively few attempts to integrate retrieval-augmented generation with 3D diffusion for ligand design, and it explicitly addresses chemical validity through latent alignment rather than handcrafted post hoc filters. However, the central Rank 1 claim is not yet established: the evaluation protocol leaves open a template-leakage pathway from the retrieval graph, the best-of-100 selection is not shown to be applied identically to baselines, and no error bars or significance tests support the ranking. The paper also contains a clear factual overstatement about validity rates. These issues are fixable in principle, but they currently prevent the central claim from being accepted as stated.

major comments (3)
  1. [Sec. 3.3(i), Fig. 5, Table 1] The retrieval graph is constructed from the CBGBench training split, and at inference each query pocket retrieves the top-4 ligands from its 40 nearest neighbors. The paper never reports the TM-align/DaliLite similarity between test pockets and the retrieved training pockets, nor does it provide a control (for example, retrieval from structurally distant pockets, or shuffled ligand labels). If test pockets share detectable homology with training pockets, the top-4 templates can be near-native binders, and the best-of-100 selection used in Fig. 5 would make the 'surpass native' gains and Rank 1 in Table 1 an artifact of template recall rather than generative generalization. Please report the similarity distribution between test pockets and retrieved training pockets and run the controls; the ablations in Table 2 do not address this issue because the retrieval graph is fixed across all rows.
  2. [Sec. 4, Table 1] All READ docking numbers are reported as the best of 100 generated molecules after filtering, but the manuscript does not state how many samples each baseline generated or whether the same best-of-N selection protocol was applied. Without this information, the comparisons in Table 1 and the improvement rates in Fig. 5 are not apples-to-apples. In addition, no error bars, independent seeds, or significance tests are reported for any metric, so the Rank 1 claim is currently supported only by point estimates and a composite score in which Dock-mode metrics are arbitrarily double-weighted. Please provide per-seed variability, statistical comparisons, and a sensitivity analysis of the ranking weights.
  3. [Sec. 5, Discussion vs. Table 1] The Discussion states that READ-2k has 'a validity rate nearly twice that of the next best method.' Table 1 reports validity 0.98 for READ-2k and 0.96 for TargetDiff (with MolCraft at 0.95), so the improvement is a few percent, not nearly twofold. This is a factual overstatement that should be corrected in the Discussion, and it also affects the paper's overall framing of the method's advantage in chemical validity.
minor comments (5)
  1. [Sec. 4.1, Table 1] The text says 'LiGAN retains the best raw Vina scores under Score and Minimize modes,' but LiGAN appears neither in the baseline list nor in Table 1. The table shows VoxBind as the best for Vina Score and Vina Min. Please clarify which model is meant or remove the sentence.
  2. [Sec. 2, Related Work] The claim that READ is 'the first retrieval-augmented diffusion framework for de novo ligand design' should be reconciled with the discussion of MolR [40], which is described as projecting retrieved molecules into pre-trained latent spaces to inform diffusion trajectories; please clarify the precise novelty claim and cite any closer prior work.
  3. [References] Reference [35] is cited for retrieval-augmented generation but points to 'Human RAG mutations: Biochemistry and clinical implications,' which is unrelated; please replace it with an appropriate RAG citation, such as Lewis et al. (2020) or a comparable source.
  4. [Sec. 3.2, Eq. (5)] The contrastive objective is written with g as the original graph embedding and g+ as the augmented positive, but the text says the encoder processes 'view pairs'; please clarify which augmentation is treated as the anchor and which as the positive in Eq. (5).
  5. [Sec. 4, Sampling cost] The sentence 'We release two READ variants' should include the repository or model availability information; currently no code or data link is provided, which limits reproducibility.

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged · score 0.0 of 10

No significant circularity: READ's docking and validity claims are evaluated by external AutoDock Vina and PLIP metrics against independent baselines on shared CBGBench splits.

full rationale

The central claims—docking energy, MPBG, interaction fidelity, and validity—are not defined in terms of READ's own outputs. The retrieval graph is a method input built from the CBGBench training split (Sec. 3.3(i)), and the reverse process is conditioned on retrieved embeddings (Sec. 3.3(iii)), but no equation forces the final Vina/PLIP numbers to equal the retrieved templates' scores; the reported values come from AutoDock Vina and PLIP v3.2, external scoring tools applied to generated molecules. The ablations in Table 2 separate alignment and retrieval and show that retrieval alone on an unaligned backbone can hurt, so the headline result is not a tautology of the retrieval mechanism. The Limitations paragraph acknowledges dependence on a pre-constructed retrieval graph for novel targets, which is an applicability limitation rather than a circularity. The paper's self-citations (e.g., [41], with co-author overlap) are motivational background, not load-bearing. The main legitimate risk is benchmark leakage—test pockets may resemble training pockets in the same CBGBench split, so retrieved templates could be near-native—but this is an empirical contamination concern, not a constructional reduction, and no quoted equation exhibits equivalence between prediction and input. The prose claim that validity is 'nearly twice' the next best is not supported by Table 1 (0.98 vs 0.96), but that is a numerical accuracy issue, not circularity. Therefore no circular step is established under the hard rules.

Assumptions & free parameters 6 free parameters · 6 assumptions · 0 invented entities

The central claim depends on several hand-chosen hyperparameters and domain assumptions about the benchmark, Vina scoring, and the analogy between pocket similarity and ligand similarity. There are no invented physical entities. The heaviest burden is the assumption that the CBGBench training split used for retrieval does not leak near-native templates for test pockets.

free parameters (6)
  • lambda (retrieval guidance weight) = not reported
    Controls the strength of the retrieval guidance term in Eq. (1); no value or tuning procedure is given.
  • beta_max, beta_min (variance schedule) = not reported
    Quadratic noise schedule in Eq. (2); hyperparameters chosen by hand without stated values.
  • tau (InfoNCE temperature) = not reported
    Temperature in contrastive and alignment losses, Eqs. (5) and (6); value not given.
  • K and m (retrieval counts) = K=40, m=4
    Shortlist size and number of retrieved ligands used in Sec. 3.3; defaults chosen without sensitivity analysis.
  • denoising steps = 1000 or 2000
    Two variants READ-1k and READ-2k; step count is a design choice.
  • drug-likeness selection thresholds = QED > 0.5, SA > 0.6, Lipinski = 5
    Used to select the Top-1 molecule per pocket in Figure 5; if baselines report unscreened molecules, comparisons are unfair.
assumptions (6)
  • domain assumption CBGBench structures and train/test splits are accurate and representative
    The retrieval graph and evaluation both depend on CBGBench; no independent validation of pocket structures or split quality is provided.
  • domain assumption AutoDock Vina scores are a valid proxy for binding affinity and comparable across methods
    All headline comparisons rely on Vina Score/Minimize/Dock; the paper does not discuss known Vina limitations or run orthogonal assays.
  • domain assumption Contrastive pretraining on 6M ZINC molecules embeds chemical validity and geometric constraints in the latent space
    The paper claims valence and synthetic feasibility arise from pretraining, but no controlled evidence isolates this effect outside the benchmark.
  • domain assumption TM-align/DaliLite pocket similarity correlates with ligand-binding similarity
    Hierarchical retrieval assumes structurally similar pockets have useful ligand templates; this is plausible but not validated in the paper.
  • standard math The SE(3)-equivariant EGNN with layer-wise alignment preserves equivariance and expressiveness in the dual-space diffusion process
    The method relies on standard equivariant GNN properties; no formal verification is provided.
  • standard math Absorbing-state diffusion over atom types with a uniform transition matrix maintains chemical validity
    Eq. (3) assumes uniform noise transitions to valid atom types; this is a standard assumption in discrete diffusion.

how reviews work

0 comments
Cite this review

Pith. "Pith review of Reimagining Target-Aware Molecular Generation through Retrieval-Enhanced Aligned Diffusion." pith.science (2026). https://pith.science/paper/M7HIKOWU

@misc{pith2026250614488,
  author       = {Pith},
  title        = {Pith review of: Reimagining Target-Aware Molecular Generation through Retrieval-Enhanced Aligned Diffusion},
  year         = {2026},
  howpublished = {\url{https://pith.science/paper/M7HIKOWU}},
  note         = {Machine review of arXiv:2506.14488}
}
read the original abstract

Breakthroughs in high-accuracy protein structure prediction, such as AlphaFold, have established receptor-based molecule design as a critical driver for rapid early-phase drug discovery. However, most approaches still struggle to balance pocket-specific geometric fit with strict valence and synthetic constraints. To resolve this trade-off, a Retrieval-Enhanced Aligned Diffusion termed READ is introduced, which is the first to merge molecular Retrieval-Augmented Generation with an SE(3)-equivariant diffusion model. Specifically, a contrastively pre-trained encoder aligns atom-level representations during training, then retrieves graph embeddings of pocket-matched scaffolds to guide each reverse-diffusion step at inference. This single mechanism can inject real-world chemical priors exactly where needed, producing valid, diverse, and shape-complementary ligands. Experimental results demonstrate that READ can achieve very competitive performance in CBGBench, surpassing state-of-the-art generative models and even native ligands. That suggests retrieval and diffusion can be co-optimized for faster, more reliable structure-based drug design.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 2506.14488 by the authors.

Figure 1
Figure 1. READ overview. The diffusion model aligns atom-level representations with those of [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p002_1.png] view at source ↗
Figure 2
Figure 2. READ pipeline. (A) Forward diffusion injects Gaussian noise into atomic coordinates and categorical noise into atom types, while the reverse process iteratively removes noise to recover a valid ligand and its position. (B) At inference, a context-aware encoder fuses a perturbed pocket-ligand pair with graph embeddings of template molecules retrieved by RAG from the pretrained latent manifold, steering the coordinate… view at source ↗
Figure 3
Figure 3. Workflow of the hierarchical retrieval augmented guidance. Hierarchical retrieval [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p005_3.png] view at source ↗
Figures from the paper (2 more)
Figure 4
Figure 4. Figure 4: Qualitative assessment of READ candidates. For three representative CBGBench targets—4KEU, 3U5Y and 2PQW (columns, left to right)—the top row displays the best READ ligand selected from 100 samples while the bottom row shows the crystallographic reference ligand. The p…
Figure 5
Figure 5. Figure 5: (a–c) Distribution of docking-performance gains achieved by selecting. For each protein [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p008_5.png]

Discussion (0). Sign in to comment.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

53 extracted references · 40 canonical work pages

  1. [1]

    Highly accurate protein structure prediction with AlphaFold

    Jumper, J., Evans, R., Pritzel, A., Green, T., Figurnov, M., Ronneberger, O., Tunyasuvunakool, K., Bates, R., Žídek, A., Potapenko, A.,et al.(2021). Highly accurate protein structure prediction with AlphaFold. Nature, 596(7873), 583–589

    work page 2021

  2. [2]

    Yang, Z., Zeng, X., Zhao, Y ., & Chen, R. (2023). AlphaFold2 and its applications in the fields of biology and medicine. Signal Transduction and Targeted Therapy, 8(1), 115

    work page 2023

  3. [3]

    Cramer, P. (2021). AlphaFold2 and the future of structural biology. Nature Structural & Molecu- lar Biology, 28(9), 704–705

    work page 2021

  4. [4]

    Akdel, M., Pires, D. E. V ., Porta Pardo, E., Jänes, J., Zalevsky, A. O., Mészáros, B., Bryant, P., Good, L. L., Laskowski, R. A., Pozzati, G.,et al.(2022). A structural biology commu- nity assessment of AlphaFold2 applications. Nature Structural & Molecular Biology, 29(11), 1056–1067

    work page 2022

  5. [5]

    Peng, X., Luo, S., Guan, J., Xie, Q., Peng, J., & Ma, J. (2022). Pocket2Mol: Efficient molecular sampling based on 3-D protein pockets. Proceedings of the 39th International Conference on Machine Learning (ICML), 17644–17655

    work page 2022

  6. [6]

    PocketFlow is a data- and knowledge-driven structure-based molecular generative model

    Jiang, Y ., Zhang, G., You, J., Zhang, H., Yao, R., Xie, H., Zhang, L., Xia, Z., Dai, M., Wu, Y ., et al.(2024). PocketFlow is a data- and knowledge-driven structure-based molecular generative model. Nature Machine Intelligence, 6(3), 326–337

    work page 2024

  7. [7]

    Generation of 3-D molecules in pockets via a language model

    Feng, W., Wang, L., Lin, Z., Zhu, Y ., Wang, H., Dong, J., Bai, R., Wang, H., Zhou, J., Peng, W., et al.(2024). Generation of 3-D molecules in pockets via a language model. Nature Machine Intelligence, 6(1), 62–73

    work page 2024

  8. [8]

    Liu, M., Luo, Y ., Uchino, K., Maruhashi, K., & Ji, S. (2022). Generating 3-D molecules for target protein binding. arXiv preprint arXiv:2204.09410

    arXiv 2022

Show all 53 references
  1. [9]

    Lin, H., Zhao, G., Zhang, O., Huang, Y ., Wu, L., Liu, Z., Li, S., Tan, C., Gao, Z., & Li, S. Z. (2024). CBGBench: Fill in the blank of protein-molecule complex binding graph. arXiv preprint arXiv:2406.10840

    2024 arXiv

  2. [10]

    ResGen is a pocket-aware 3-D molecular generation model based on parallel multiscale modelling

    Zhang, O., Zhang, J., Jin, J., Zhang, X., Hu, R., Shen, C., Cao, H., Du, H., Kang, Y ., Deng, Y .,et al.(2023). ResGen is a pocket-aware 3-D molecular generation model based on parallel multiscale modelling. Nature Machine Intelligence, 5(9), 1020–1030

    2023

  3. [11]

    Zhang, O., Huang, Y ., Cheng, S., Yu, M., Zhang, X., Lin, H., Zeng, Y ., Wang, M., Wu, Z., & Zhao, H. (2024). FragGen: Towards 3-D geometry-reliable fragment-based molecular generation. Chemical Science, 15(46), 19452–19465

    2024

  4. [12]

    Ho, J., Jain, A., & Abbeel, P. (2020). Denoising diffusion probabilistic models. Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems, 33, 6840–6851

    2020

  5. [13]

    Q., & Dhariwal, P

    Nichol, A. Q., & Dhariwal, P. (2021). Improved denoising diffusion probabilistic models. Proceedings of the 38th International Conference on Machine Learning (ICML), 8162–8171. 10

    2021

  6. [14]

    Song, J., Meng, C., & Ermon, S. (2020). Denoising diffusion implicit models. arXiv preprint arXiv:2010.02502

    2020 arXiv

  7. [15]

    P., Kumar, A., Ermon, S., & Poole, B

    Song, Y ., Sohl-Dickstein, J., Kingma, D. P., Kumar, A., Ermon, S., & Poole, B. (2020). Score-based generative modeling through stochastic differential equations. arXiv preprint arXiv:2011.13456

    2020 arXiv

  8. [16]

    Vahdat, A., Kreis, K., & Kautz, J. (2021). Score-based generative modeling in latent space. Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems, 34, 11287–11302

    2021

  9. [17]

    Song, Y ., & Ermon, S. (2020). Improved techniques for training score-based generative models. Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems, 33, 12438–12448

    2020

  10. [18]

    Hoogeboom, E., Garcia Satorras, V ., Vignac, C., & Welling, M. (2022). Equivariant diffusion for molecule generation in 3-D. Proceedings of the 39th International Conference on Machine Learning (ICML), 8867–8887

    2022

  11. [19]

    Cornet, F., Bartosh, G., Schmidt, M., & Naesseth, C. A. (2024). Equivariant neural diffusion for molecule generation. Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems, 37, 49429–49460

    2024

  12. [20]

    L., & Liò, P.,et al.(2024)

    Schneuing, A., Harris, C., Du, Y ., Didi, K., Jamasb, A., Igashov, I., Du, W., Gomes, C., Blundell, T. L., & Liò, P.,et al.(2024). Structure-based drug design with equivariant diffusion models. Nature Computational Science, 4(12), 899–909

    2024

  13. [21]

    Gu, S., Xu, M., Powers, A., Nie, W., Geffner, T., Kreis, K., Leskovec, J., Vahdat, A., & Ermon, S. (2024). Aligning target-aware molecule diffusion models with exact energy optimization. Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems, 37, 44040–44063

    2024

  14. [22]

    W., Peng, X., Su, Y ., Peng, J., & Ma, J

    Guan, J., Qian, W. W., Peng, X., Su, Y ., Peng, J., & Ma, J. (2023). 3-D equivariant diffusion for target-aware molecule generation and affinity prediction. arXiv preprint arXiv:2303.03543

    2023 arXiv

  15. [23]

    Qian, H., Huang, W., Tu, S., & Xu, L. (2024). KGDiff: Towards explainable target-aware molecule generation with knowledge guidance. Briefings in Bioinformatics, 25(1), bbad435

    2024

  16. [24]

    Guan, J., Zhou, X., Yang, Y ., Bao, Y ., Peng, J., Ma, J., Liu, Q., Wang, L., & Gu, Q. (2024). DecompDiff: Diffusion models with decomposed priors for structure-based drug design. arXiv preprint arXiv:2403.07902

    2024 arXiv

  17. [25]

    Xu, M., Powers, A., Dror, R., Ermon, S., & Leskovec, J. (2023). Geometric latent diffusion models for 3-D molecule generation. Proceedings of the 40th International Conference on Machine Learning (ICML), 38592–38610

    2023

  18. [26]

    Lin, H., Huang, Y ., Zhang, O., Ma, S., Liu, M., Li, X., Wu, L., Wang, J., Hou, T., & Li, S. Z. (2025). DiffBP: Generative diffusion of 3-D molecules for target protein binding. Chemical Science, 16(3), 1417–1431

    2025

  19. [27]

    Lin, H., Huang, Y ., Zhang, O., Liu, Y ., Wu, L., Li, S., Chen, Z., & Li, S. Z. (2023). Functional- group-based diffusion for pocket-specific molecule generation and elaboration. Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems, 36, 34603–34626

    2023

  20. [28]

    Zhang, Z., Min, Y ., Zheng, S., & Liu, Q. (2023). Molecule generation for target protein binding with structural motifs. Proceedings of the 11th International Conference on Learning Representations (ICLR)

    2023

  21. [29]

    UniMoMo: Unified generative modeling of 3-D molecules for de novo binder design

    Kong, X., Zhang, Z., Zhang, Z., Jiao, R., Ma, J., Liu, K., & Huang, W.,et al.(2025). UniMoMo: Unified generative modeling of 3-D molecules for de novo binder design. arXiv preprint arXiv:2503.19300

    2025 arXiv

  22. [30]

    Halgren, T. A. (1999). MMFF VI. MMFF94s option for energy minimization studies. Journal of Computational Chemistry, 20(7), 720–729

    1999

  23. [31]

    J., Tang, K

    Irwin, J. J., Tang, K. G., Young, J., Dandarchuluun, C., Wong, B., Khurelbaatar, M., Moroz, Y ., Mayfield, J., & Sayle, R. A. (2020). ZINC20—A free ultralarge-scale chemical database for ligand discovery. Journal of Chemical Information and Modeling, 60(12), 6065–6073. 11

    2020

  24. [32]

    Zhang, Y ., & Skolnick, J. (2005). TM-align: A protein structure alignment algorithm based on the TM-score. Nucleic Acids Research, 33(7), 2302–2309

    2005

  25. [33]

    Holm, L., & Park, J. (2000). DaliLite workbench for protein structure comparison. Bioinformat- ics, 16(6), 566–567

    2000

  26. [34]

    Zhang, Z., & Liu, Q. (2023). Learning subpocket prototypes for generalizable structure-based drug design. Proceedings of the 40th International Conference on Machine Learning (ICML), 41382–41398

    2023

  27. [35]

    D., Kim, M

    Notarangelo, L. D., Kim, M. S., Walter, J. E., & Lee, Y . N. (2016). Human RAG mutations: Biochemistry and clinical implications. Nature Reviews Immunology, 16(4), 234–246

    2016

  28. [36]

    O., & Larson, J

    Edge, D., Trinh, H., Cheng, N., Bradley, J., Chao, A., Mody, A., Truitt, S., Metropolitansky, D., Ness, R. O., & Larson, J. (2024). From local to global: A graph RAG approach to query-focused summarization. arXiv preprint arXiv:2404.16130

    2024 arXiv

  29. [37]

    V ., Bello, S., Blumberg, K., Cameron, R., Carmody, L.,et al.(2024)

    Toro, S., Anagnostopoulos, A. V ., Bello, S., Blumberg, K., Cameron, R., Carmody, L.,et al.(2024). Dynamic retrieval-augmented generation of ontologies using artificial intelligence (DRAGON-AI). Journal of Biomedical Semantics, 15(1), 19

    2024

  30. [38]

    R., van der Schaar, M., & Deane, C

    Imrie, F., Bradley, A. R., van der Schaar, M., & Deane, C. M. (2020). Deep generative models for 3-D linker design. Journal of Chemical Information and Modeling, 60(4), 1983–1995

    2020

  31. [39]

    Lee, S., Kreis, K., Veccham, S., Liu, M., Reidenbach, D., Paliwal, S., & Nie, W. (2024). Molecule generation with fragment retrieval augmentation. Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems, 37, 132463–132490

    2024

  32. [40]

    Wang, H., Li, W., Jin, X., Cho, K., Ji, H., & Han, J., & Burke, M. D. (2021). Chemical-reaction- aware molecule representation learning. arXiv preprint arXiv:2109.09888

    2021 arXiv

  33. [41]

    C., et al.(2024)

    Huang, L., Xu, T., Yu, Y ., Zhao, P., Chen, X., Han, J., Xie, Z., Li, H., Zhong, W., Wong, K. C., et al.(2024). A dual diffusion model enables 3-D molecule generation and lead optimization based on target pockets. Nature Communications, 15(1), 2657

    2024

  34. [42]

    Liu, L., He, D., Fang, X., Zhang, S., Wang, F., He, J., & Wu, H. (2022). GEM-2: Next-generation molecular property prediction network by modeling full-range many-body interactions. arXiv preprint arXiv:2208.05863

    2022 arXiv

  35. [43]

    Wang, Y ., Wang, J., Cao, Z., & Farimani, A. B. (2022). Molecular contrastive learning of representations via graph neural networks. Nature Machine Intelligence, 4(3), 279–287

    2022

  36. [44]

    Liu, Z., Yang, D., Wang, Y ., Lu, M., & Li, R. (2023). EGNN: Graph structure learning based on evolutionary computation helps more in graph neural networks. Applied Soft Computing, 135, 110040

    2023

  37. [45]

    Yu, S., Kwak, S., Jang, H., Jeong, J., Huang, J., & Shin, J., & Xie, S. (2024). Representation alignment for generation: Training diffusion transformers is easier than you think. arXiv preprint arXiv:2410.06940

    2024 arXiv

  38. [46]

    (2015).msa: An R package for multiple sequence alignment

    Bodenhofer, U., Bonatesta, E., Horejš-Kainrath, C., & Hochreiter, S. (2015).msa: An R package for multiple sequence alignment. Bioinformatics, 31(24), 3997–3999

    2015

  39. [47]

    Trott, O., & Olson, A. J. (2010). AutoDock Vina: Improving the speed and accuracy of docking with a new scoring function, efficient optimization, and multithreading. Journal of Computa- tional Chemistry, 31(2), 455–461

    2010

  40. [48]

    Masuda, T., Ragoza, M., & Koes, D. R. (2020). Generating 3-D molecular structures conditional on a receptor binding site with deep generative models. arXiv preprint arXiv:2010.14442

    2020 arXiv

  41. [49]

    Luo, S., Guan, J., Ma, J., & Peng, J. (2021). A 3-D generative model for structure-based drug design. Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems, 34, 6229–6239

    2021

  42. [50]

    Qu, Y ., Qiu, K., Song, Y ., Gong, J., Han, J., Zheng, M., & Zhou, H., & Ma, W. (2024). MolCraft: Structure-based drug design in continuous parameter space. arXiv preprint arXiv:2404.12141. 12

    2024 arXiv

  43. [51]

    O., Jamasb, A., Mahmood, O., Sresht, V ., & Saremi, S

    Pinheiro, P. O., Jamasb, A., Mahmood, O., Sresht, V ., & Saremi, S. (2024). Structure-based drug design by denoising voxel grids. arXiv preprint arXiv:2405.03961

    2024 arXiv

  44. [52]

    J., Adasme, M

    Salentin, S., Schreiber, S., Haupt, V . J., Adasme, M. F., & Schroeder, M. (2015). PLIP: Fully automated protein–ligand interaction profiler. Nucleic Acids Research, 43(W1), W443–W447

    2015

  45. [53]

    Wang, Z., Nie, W., Qiao, Z., Xiao, C., Baraniuk, R., & Anandkumar, A. (2022). Retrieval-based controllable molecule generation. arXiv preprint arXiv:2208.11126. 13

    2022 arXiv

Pith tools

Reviewed August 7, 2026 · model on record in the stance chip above.