arXiv:2510. 24380v2 Announce Type: replace Abstract: Make-on-demand combinatorial synthesis libraries (CSLs) like Enamine REAL have significantly enabled drug discovery efforts.
By Aryan Pedawi, Jordi Silvestre-Ryan, Bradley Worley, Darren J Hsu, Kushal S Shah, Elias Stehle, Jingrong Zhang, Izhar Wallach
arXiv:2606. 26657v1 Announce Type: new Abstract: Identifying high-utility candidates from massive discrete spaces under expensive evaluations is a recurring challenge across the sciences, with structure-based drug discovery as a prominent example.
By Mohammad Haddadnia, Yuvan Chali, Abhilash Jayaraj, Constance Kraay, Joana Reis, Felix Strieth-Kalthoff, Haribabu Arthanari
arXiv:2509. 26405v2 Announce Type: replace Abstract: We introduce InVirtuoGen, a discrete flow generative model for fragmented SMILES for de novo and fragment-constrained generation, and target-property/lead optimization of small molecules.
By Benno Kaech, Luis Wyss, Karsten Borgwardt, Gianvito Grasso
The paper introduces Mol-E, an evolutionary algorithm that leverages large language models trained on molecular data to generate candidate molecules. Mol-E achieves state‑of‑the‑art performance on the Practical Molecular Optimization benchmark, scoring 17.500 in the task‑agnostic regime and 20.551 in the task‑informed regime. It also outperforms baseline methods in multi‑property optimization tasks involving docking against DRD2, MK2, and AChE.
By Philipp Guevorguian, Menua Bedrosian, Tigran Fahradyan, Gayane Chilingaryan, Armen Aghajanyan, Hrant Khachatrian
arXiv:2607. 12488v1 Announce Type: new Abstract: Molecular optimization in drug discovery, materials design, and catalysis requires searching vast chemical spaces under tight evaluation budgets, since high-fidelity oracles and experimental measurements are costly.
By Sarina Kopf, Cristina Nevado, Philippe Schwaller
TopU-LBVS is a new multi‑target benchmark for ligand‑based virtual screening that addresses shortcomings of existing datasets by using hard‑negative decoys and a fixed 1:40 active‑to‑decoy ratio. It covers 93 protein targets across seven classes, provides three evaluation protocols (full, low‑data, and mini), and includes curated ChEMBL‑35 bioactivity data with property‑matched, structurally similar decoys. The benchmark demonstrates that performance drops sharply when moving from random‑decoy to hard‑negative evaluation, and it releases data, splits, code, and baseline implementations for reproducible comparison.
By Surbhi Kumar, Yuhe Zhou, Varun Shiralkar, Niu Huang, Baris Coskunuzer