Learning to Make Generalizable and Diverse Predictions for Retrosynthesis
Authors: Benson Chen
Tianxiao Shen
Tommi S. Jaakkola
Regina Barzilay
Venue:  (2020)
Keywords: Chemistry
Retrosynthesis
Transformer
Pre-training
Diversity

Abstract: We propose a new model for making generalizable and diverse retrosynthetic reaction predictions. Given a target compound, the task is to predict the likely chemical reactants to produce the target. This generative task can be framed as a sequence-to-sequence problem by using the SMILES representations of the molecules. Building on top of the popular Transformer architecture, we propose two novel pre-training methods that construct relevant auxiliary tasks (plausible reactions) for our problem. Furthermore, we incorporate a discrete latent variable model into the architecture to encourage the model to produce a diverse set of alternative predictions. On the 50k subset of reaction examples from the United States patent literature (USPTO-50k) benchmark dataset, our model greatly improves performance over the baseline, while also generating predictions that are more diverse.

Under review as a conference paper at ICLR 2020
LEARNING TO MAKE GENERALIZABLE AND DIVERSE PREDICTIONS FOR RETROSYNTHESIS
Anonymous authors Paper under double-blind review
ABSTRACT
We propose a new model for making generalizable and diverse retrosynthetic re- action predictions. Given target compound, the task is to predict the likely chemical reactants to produce the target. This generative task can be framed sequence-to-sequeee problem by using the SMILES representations of the molecules. Building on top of the popular Transformer architecture, we propose two novel pre-training methods that construct relevant auxiliary tasks (plausible reactions) for our problem. Furthermore, we incorporate a discrete latent variable model into the architecture to encourage the model produce diverse set of alternative predictions. On the 50k subset of reaction examples from the United States patent literature (USPTO-50K) benchmark dataset, our model greatly im- proves performance over the baseline, while also generating predictions that are more diverse.
INTRODUCTION
This paper proposes a novel approach for one-step retrosynthesis. This task crucial for material and drug manufacturing (Corey & Wipke 1969 Corey 1991) and aims to predict which reactants are needed to generate a given target molecule as the main product. For instance, Figure demon- expressed here SMILES string
strates that the input molecule "NN [Weininger] 1988), can be generated using reactants "CScl (cN=NNN))) For decades, this task has been solved using template-based approaches (Gelernter al.) 1990 Satoh & Funatsu 1999). Templates encode transformation rules as regular expressions operating on SMILES strings and are typically extracted directly from the available training reactions. The primary limitation of such templates is coverage, i.e., it is possible that none of the templates applies test molecule. In order to better generalize newer or broader chemical spaces, recently devel- oped template-fre approaches cast the problem as sequence-to-sequenee to-sequence prediction task. These approaches were first explored by Liu et al. (017) using LSTM models; current state-of-the-art performance on this task uses Transformer models (Lin et al. 2019 Karpov et al. 2019).
and "CICCI"
Out-of-the-box Transformers nevertheless do not effectively generalize to rare reactions. For in- stance, model accuracy drops by 25% on reactions with 10 or fewer representative instances in the
Input Target:
Output Prodiction:
Na Ni
N N
CICCI
SMILES: IN C
Output SMILES: CSdoocCNNNNNHNNNeeeee..
Figure 1: An example prediction task: on the left is the input target SMILES, and on the right the output reactants SMILES. The input is a single molecule, while the output is a set of molecules separated by period (*"".

---

Under review as a conference paper at ICLR 2020
training set Another key issue is diversity. Manufacturing processes involve number of addi- tional criteria - such as green chemistry (having low detrimental effects on the environment). is therefore helpful to generate diverse collection of alternative ways of synthesizing the given target molecule. However, predicted reactions are unlikely to encompass multiple reaction classes (see Figure ) without additional guidance. This is because the training data only provides single reactant set for each input target, even if this is not the only valid reaction to synthesize the target.
Target
Prediction
1
Prediction
Prediction
H&N
Figure 2: For the input target compound shown on the left, three possible reactant predictions are shown on the right. Prediction 1 suggestions a heterocycle formation reaction, while Predictions 2 and 3 both suggest substitution reactions. The only difference between the latter two the halide functional group (CI vs Br) highlighted in red. They share similar chemical properties and thus provide no additional insights for chemists.
We extend molecular Transformers to address both of these challenges. First, we propose novel pre-training approach to drive molecular representations to better retain alternative reaction possibil- ities. Our approach is reminiscent of successful pre-training schemes in natural language processing (NLP) applications (Devlin et al., 2018). However, rather than using conventional token masking methods, we adopt chemically-relevant auxiliary tasks. Each training instance presents single way to decompose a target molecule into its reactants. Here, we add alternative proxy decompositions for each target molecule by either 1) randomly removing bond types that can possibly break during reactions, or 2) transforming the target based on templates. While neither of these two auxiliary tasks are guaranteed construct valid chemical reactions, they are closely related to the task of interest. Indeed, representations trained in this manner provide useful initializations for the actual retrosynthesis problem.
To improve the diversity of predicted reactions, we incorporate latent variables into the generation process. Specifically, merge the Transformer architecture with discrete mixture over reactions. The role of the latent variable is to encode distinct modes that can be related to underlying reaction classes. Even though the training data only presents one reaction for each target molecule, our model learns to associate each reaction with latent class, and in the process covers multiple reaction classes across the training set. At test time, diverse collection of reactions is then obtained by collecting together predictions resulting from conditioning on each latent class. Analogous mixture models have shown promise in generating diverse predictions in natural language translation tasks (He et al. 2018 [Shen et al. 2019). We demonstrate similar gains in the chemical context.
We evaluate our model on the benchmark USPTO-50k dataset, and compare it against state-of- the-art template-free baselines using the Transformer model. We focus our evaluation top-10 10 accuracy, because there are many equally valuable reaction transformations for each input target, though only one is presented in the data. Compared the baseline, we achieve better performance overall, with over 13% increase in top-10 accuracy for our best model. When we create split of the data based on different reaction templates (a task that any template-based model would fail on), we similarly observe a performance increase for our model. Additionally, we demonstrate that our model outputs exhibit significant diversity through both quantitative and human evaluations.
2 RELATED WORK
Template-based Models Traditional methods for retrosynthetic reaction prediction use template- based models. Templates, or rules, denote the exact atom and bond changes for a chemical reaction.
See Appendix A for details how this dataset is constructed.
2

---

Under review as a conference paper at ICLR 2020
Coley et al. (2018) applies these templates for given target compound based similar reactions in the dataset. Going one step further, Segler Waller (2017) learns the associations between molecules and templates through neural network. Baylon et al. (2019) uses hierarchical network to first predict the reaction group and then the correct template for that group. However, to have the flexibility to generalize beyond extracted rules, explore template-free generative models.
Molecule Generation There are two different approaches to generative tasks for molecules, demon- strated through graph and SMILES representations. The graph-generation problem has been ex- plored in Li et al. (2018) as a node-by-node generation algorithm, but this model does not guarantee the validity of the output chemical graph. Jin al. (2018a b) improves upon this method using junction-tree encoder-decodes that forces the outputs to be constrained in the valid chemical space; however, these models require complex, structured decoders. We focus on the generative task of SMILES string representations of the molecules, which has been explored in Kusner et al. (2017) and Gommez-Bombrelli al. (2018).
Pre-training Pre-training methods have been shown vastly improve the performance of Trans- former models NLP tasks without additional data supervision. Devlin et al. (2018) use a masked language modeling objective to help their model learn effective representations for downstream tasks. Similar pre-training methods on molecules have been explored by Hu et al. (2019), where they mask out atoms in molecular graphs. Mcanwhile, our work does not use masked objective, but instead creates pre-training tasks that are relevant to the retrosynthesis prediction problem.
3 BACKGROUND
Given an input target molecule, the task of retrosynthetic reaction prediction is to output likely reactants that can form the target product. Formally, we express a molecule as a text string via its SMILES representation, and cast our task into sequence-to-sequence (seq2seq) prediction problem (example shown in Figure []. For this task, the input target is always single molecule, while the output predictions are usually a of more than one molecule concatenated by separators ".".
To provide more intuition for this generative task, we describe some properties of SMILES strings. Each SMILES string 1-D encoding of a 2-D molecular graph. If the predicted SMILESS does not adhere to the SMILES grammar, then a valid molecular graph cannot be reconstructed. Moreover, each molecule has many equivalent SMILES representations, as a single instance of its SMILES just graph traversal starting at some arbitrary node. Therefore, two very different SMILES string can encode the same molecule (see Appendix B). and the model needs to be robust to the given input. One method, proposed by Schwaller al. (2019). augments the input data with different SMILES strings the same input target molecule.
For model architecture, apply Transformer model for the seg2seq task, which has an encoder-decoder structure (Vaswani et al.] 2017 [Schwaller et al.] 2019). The encoder maps an input sequence of tokens (from the SMILES string) sequence of continuous representations, which are then fed to the decoder to generate an output sequence of tokens one element at a time, auto-regressively. Once the model is trained, beam search procedure is used inference time to find likely output sequences.
The main building block of the Transformer architecture lies in its global self-attention layers. which are well-suited for predictions of the latent graph structure of SMILES strings. For example, two tokens that are far apart in the SMILES string could be close together topologically in the cor- responding molecular graph. The global connectivity of the Transformer model allows it to better leverage this information. Additionally, since SMILES follow a rigid grammar requiring long range- dependencies, these dependencies can be more easily learned through global attention layers (see Appendix
APPROACH
Despite the flexible architecture of Transformer models, recognize that there ways to improve model generalization. Additionally, there is no inductive bias for proposing diverse outputs. We propose two techniques to enhance the base molecular Transformer model, which we describe now.
3

---

Under review as a conference paper at ICLR 2020
4.1 PRE-TRAINING
In the data, each imput target molecule is associated with single reaction transformation - though there are many equally good chemical reactions. Therefore, for each input target, we construct several new prediction examples that chemically meaningful, and pre-train the model these auxiliary examples. We do so without requiring additionally data, or data supervision. The two variants of our method described detail below, with examples shown in Figure 3
1. Imput Targel Molecule:
Random Pre-train Esample:
Template-hused Pre-train Example:
NH
Br
Figure 3: Input target molecule (1) with two automatically generated pre-training targets formed by breaking the bond highlighted in red. Examples (2) and (3) are generated from the random and template-baset methods respectively. The only difference is that the template-basee pre-training example (3) adds an additional function group to the molecule (blue).
Random pre-training For each input target molecule, we generate new examples by selecting random bond to break. The types of bonds that we consider are acyclic single bonds, because these are the bonds most commonly broken in chemical reactions. As we break an acyelic bond, the input molecule is necessarily broken up into two output molecules, each being a subgraph of the input molecule. Although the examples generated by this method do not cover the entire space of chemical reactions (for instance some reactions do not break any bonds at all), these examples are easy to generate and cover a diverse range of transformations.
Template-based pre-training Instead of randomly breaking bonds, can also use the templates extracted from the training data to create reaction examples. An example of a template is shown in Figure each template matches specific pattern in the input molecule, and transforms that pattern according to the template specifications. When the matched pattern a single acyclic bond, this method will generate similar outputs the random pre-training method, except that templates usually add additional pieces (functional groups) to the output example.
Br
R
R
Figure 4: An example of a template, where the exact bond changes are described in red. The "C-N" bond (left) is broken and "Br" atom is attached to the broken "C" atom (right).
As shown in Figure 3 both examples are derived from the same bond broken in the input target molecule, but for the template-based example, an additional functional group was added, matching more realistic reaction context. On average, for a random input molecule, there are 10 different possible examples that can extracted from the random pre-training method, while there are over 200 different possible examples that can be extracted using the template-based based pre-training method. However, many of these 200 examples represent similar chemical transformations, only differing in the type of functional group added.
More broadly speaking, we can say that the template pre-training method generates more chemically valid reactions compared to the random pre-training method. However, the advantage of the random pre- pre-training method is that can break bonds that are not represented within the templates, thereby perhaps conferring higher ability to generalize. As routine. the model is pre-trained on these automatically constructed auxiliary tasks, and then used as initialization to be tne-ttuned on the actual retrosynthesis data.
4

---

Under review as a conference paper at ICLR 2020
4.2 MIXTURE MODEL
Next, we tackle the problem of generating diverse predictions. As mentioned earlier, the retrosyn- thesis problem is one-to-many mapping since a target molecule can be formed from different types of reactions. We would like the model to produce diverse set of predictions so that chemists can choose the most feasible and economical one in practice. However, hypotheses generated by vanilla seq2seq model with beam search typically exemplifies low diversity with only minor dif- ferences in the suflix, see Figure g (Vijayakumar et al. 2016). To address this, we use a mixture seq2seq model that has shown sucess generating diverse machine translations generate diverse retrosynthesis reaction predictions (He et al. 2018 Shen et al. 2019).
CI
Top-1
<TART>
C
0
Top-2
C
Br
Top-3
Figure 5: An example beam search; often times, the outputs of a beam search will be very similar to each other, here only differing in a single atom for the top predictions.
Specifically, given a target SMILES string x and reactants SMILES string y, a mixture model in- troduces multinomial latent variable {1,".,, K) capture different reaction types, and decomposes the marginal likelihood as:
K plyl:; 0) Σ plu 2|2;0) = Σ ()pull)
K
(1)
Here, the prior p(z|>r; 0) and likelihood p(yl 2 xz; 0) parameterized by 0 are functions to be learned.
We use a uniform prior p(=[æ;; 1/K, which is easy to implement and works well in prac- tice (Shen et al. 2019). For p(y|2, x; f), we share the encoder-decoder network among mixture components, and feed the embedding of an input to the decoder so that y is conditioned on it. The increase in the parameters of our model is negligible over the baseline model.
We train the mixture model with the online hard-EM algorithm. Taking mini-batch of training examples ((x(() )()) we enumerate all K values of 2 and compute their loss, - llog (0, 0). Then, for each (zr(0), ())),, we select the value of that yields the minimum loss: 20) arg min_- log (2) (1) 0), and back-propagate through it, so only one compo- nent receives gradients per example. An important detail for successfully training a mixture model is that dropout is turned off in the forward passes for latent variable selection, and turned back on at back-prop proc-propagation time for gradient regularization. Otherwise even a small amount of dropout noise will corrupt the optimal value of making the selection random and the different latent components will fail to diversify (Shen et al. 2019).
The hard selection of the latent variable forces different components specialize different subsets of the data. As we shall later see in the experimental results, our mixture model can learn to represent different reaction types in the training data and show improved diversity over the baseline.
EXPERIMENTAL SETUP
5.1
DATA
The benchmark dataset we use is a subset of the open source patent database of chemical reactions (Lowe. 2012). Specifically, we use the curated 50k subset (USPTO-50K) from Liu et al. (2117). including the same data splits. Each example reaction this dataset is labeled with one of ten reaction classes, which describes its transformation type, but we do not use this information in experiments, similar to Karpov et al.] (2019). Since we are only interested in the retrosynthesis prediction problem, the examples are processed remove any reagent molecules (molecules that do
5

---

Under review as a conference paper at ICLR 2020
not contribute atoms to the reaction). The reactions are tokenized in the same manner in Schwaller et al. (2019), with each token being a meaningful subunit of the molecule (i.e., an atom or bond).
In addition, create separate split of the USPTO-50k data, in which the train and test sets split by reaction templates. Specifically, we split the data so that no example in the test set can be solved correctly with any templates extracted from training data. We use the template extraction code from Coley et al. (2017), which to the best of our knowledge, is the only publicly available template extraction code.
5.2 EVALUATION METRICS
Accuracy The evaluation of retrosynthesis is challenging, because each input target has many valid syntheses, but only one is given in the data. When the model output does not exactly match the single solution in the data, the model is not necessarily wrong, but simply giving a plausible alternative. Therefore, we focus on the top-10 accuracy for our evaluation, but present all results from our experiments. We compute the accuracies by matching the canonical SMILES strings of molecule sets. For the mixture model, we output the top 10 predictions for each latent class, and then combine those results based on likelihoods to get top 10 predictions overall.
Diversity To measure diversity, we provide both quantitative and human evaluations. For the former, train model to predict the reaction class given the input target molecule and the predicted output. We use a typical message-passing graph convolution network (Jin et al. (017) to embed both the input and output molecules (using weight-sharing a difference of the two embeddings. This predictor is trained on the 10 reaction class labels in the
and compute the reaction embedding as
USPTO-50K dataset, and achieves 99% accuracy on the test set, so we can be fairly confident in its ability to predict the reaction class in-domain.
5.3 BASELINES
Our main baseline is the SMILES transformer (Base), adapted from Schwaller et al. (2019), We the same model as other recent works for this task (Lin et al. 2019: Karpov al. 2019). and we build on top of the Transformer implementation from OpenNMT (Klein et al.] 2017). We run ablation experiments for pre-training and different mixture models show the impact of each approach. Random pre-training is referred to as Pre-train (R), while template-based pre-training referred to as Pre-train (T). For each example, we construct up to 10 new auxiliary examples, and pre-train the model on these examples. Additionally, following SSchwaller et al.] (2019). we also augment the training data with variations of the input SMILES string, referred to as Aug. That is, for each training example, we add extra example using a different input SMILES string, which is trained to predict the same output reactants. This helps the model learn representations robust to the permutation of the input SMILES string. In addition to our experiments, we include template- based approach from|Cole Colcy et al. (2018), and a template-fie approach from Zheng et al. (2019) that adds syntax predictor top of the transformer model.
RESULTS
Accuracy The accuracy results of our model is shown in Table 1 We observe that both pre-training tasks improve over the baseline, and more so when combined with data augmentation. This shows that our pre-training tasks help the model learn the chemical reaction representational space, and useful for the retrosynthesis prediction problem. However, interestingly, there seem to be marginal differences between the two pre-training methods. We attribute this to the fact that both pre-training methods usually generate very similar sets of examples. Previously shown in Figure 3 one of the main differences of template-base since these generated examples are not always chemically valid, having this extra information may not prove to be very valuable. We do note, however, that constructing additional decompositions of the input targets does actually matter for the pre-training task. We had also experimented with pre- training methods that only used variations of the input SMILES strings as pre-training output targets (because each molecule has many different SMILES representations).. However, these methods did not result in the same performance gains, because these pre-training targets do not contain much useful information for the actual task.
pre-training just that adds additional functional groups But

---

Under review as a conference paper at ICLR 2020
Model
Top-1
Top-2
Top-3
Top-4
Top-5
Top-10
Template SCROP
Coley al.
2017
37.3
54.7
63.3
74.1
Zheng et
2019)
43.7
60.0
65.2
68.7
Base
42.0
52.8
57.0
59.9
61.9
65.7
Latent N =
Aug
44.0
55.3
60.1
63.0
65.1
69.0
Pre-train (R)
43.3
54.6
59.7
62.4
64.6
68.7
Pre-train (T)
43.5
55.6
61.5
64.8
67.4
71.3
Pre-train (R) Aug
(44.8)
57.1
62.6
65.7
67.7
71.1
Pre-train (T) Aug
44.5
56.9
62.7
65.6
67.7
71.7
Base
42.1
54.4
60.0
63.1
64.9
70.3
Latent N =
Aug
43.1
56.6
62.2
65.9
68.1
73.3
Pre-train (R)
42.5
56.1
61.8
65.4
67.7
72.9
Pre-train (T)
42.7
56.0
62.3
66.0
68.0
74.2
Pre-train (R) Aug
43.6
(57.7)
63.7
67.3
69.6
75.2
Pre-train (T) Aug
42.6
57.0
64.0
68.6
71.3
76.6
Base
39.1
55.4
62.5
66.5
69.1
74.5
Latent N =
Aug
39.7
56.9
64.1
68.1
71.1
77.0
Pre-train (R)
39.7
55.8
63.5
67.6
70.1
76.0
Pre-train (T)
39.9
54.6
62.9
68.2
71.2
77.7
Pre-train (R) Aug
40.2
56.7
64.9
69.6
72.4
78.4
Pre-train (T) Aug
40.5
56.8
(65.1)
(70.1)
(72.8)
(79.4)
Table 1: Accuracy metrics the USPTO-50K dataset without reaction labels. The variations test are data augmentation, pre-training and number of latent classes. The highest accuracy model for each different latent model bolded, and the highest accuracy model overall is parenthesized.
Our original motivation for using mixture model was to improve diversity, but we observe that also leads to an increase in performance. We try N (1, 5) for the number of discrete latent classes, and we see that more latent classes generally leads to higher accuracies. The top-1 aceu- racy does decrease slightly the number of latent classes increases, but observe much higher accuracies at top-10 (increase 7-8%). Importantly, we note that our method of combining outputs from different latent classes is not perfect, the likelihoods from different latent classes not totally comparable. That likely the cause of the decrease in top-1 accuracy; yet as we mentioned in Section 5.2 top-10 accuracies significantly more meaningful for our problem.
Top-1
Top-2
Top-3
Top-4
Top-5
Top-10
Base Model
4.3
8.7
11.9
14.7
16.6
20.6
Best Mixture Model
5.5
9.2
12.6
15.4
17.6
26.6
Table 2: Prediction accuracies when tested on our template split of the USPTO dataset, for which any cmmplat-bbsed model would get 0% accuracy the test set. We that template-fres methods can still generalize to this test set.
Next, we show our results on a different split of the data, which is more challenging to generalize. Using the dataset split on templates described Section 5.1 we explore the performance of our best mixture model with pre-training compared to the baseline with no pre-training. As mentioned earlier, template-free models confer advantages over template-based models, as template-based models lack the ability to generalize outside of extracted rules. For this dataset, any template-based model would necessarily achieve 0% accuracy based on construction. Table 2 compares the performance of the different models and see that, although the task is challenging, of 26.6% at top-10 compared to 20.6% of the baseline. Even on this difficult task, we show that our model offers generalizability the test
attain substantial accuracy

---

determine diversity Under review as a conference paper at ICLR 2020
Human Diversity
Unique Reactions
Base Model
21
Base Model
2.66
Mixture Model
43
Mixture Model
3.32
Neither
36
Table 3: The left table shows the comparison of number of unique reactions predicted by the base
model vs. the mixture model (holding other factors constant). The right table shows human eval- uation metrics, in which a human was asked rate whether the outputs of the base model or the mixture model was more diverse, or neither.
0.
0.4
Latent Class
0.3
3-
0.
Reaction Class
Figure 6: Heat map plotting the frequency that each latent class generates a specific reaction class. Here, use mixture model with 5 latent classes, and there are 10 reaction classes of interest for this data set. The reaction classes are determined by a pre-trained model described Section 5.2
Diversity We now look evaluations of diversity for our model. Using the reaction class model described in Section 5.2 we predict the reaction class for every output of our models. Then, we compute the average number of unique reaction classes, holding all other factors constant besides varying the number of latent classes (results shown in Table 3) The number of unique reaction classes 3.32 for the mixture model compared to the 2.66 for the base model, suggesting that the mixture model predicts more diverse cast of outputs.
The diversity of the predictions can also be examined from an interpretability standpoint for the latent classes of the mixture model. Using the reaction class model, we take the 10 top predictions from each latent class, and count the number of occurrences for each reaction class. Normalizing reaction classes, distribution of reaction classes.
from Figure 6 that each latent class learns to predict different
We also supplement diversity results with human evaluation. To make the problem tractable for a human chemist, we randomly select 100 different reactions from the test set and present the top predicted outputs from both the base and mixture model, where the the task based on number of different types of reactions. The human chemist is asked to choose which of the output sets is more diverse, neither the two sets do not differ in diversity (see Appendix C For this task, the human chemist chose the mixture model more than twice often the base model (43 times vs 21), see Table 3 Although not perfect, these results exemplify that our model does generate more diverse outputs than the baseline.
7 CONCLUSION
We explored the problem of making one-step retrosynthesis reaction predictions, dealing with the issues of generalizability and making diverse predictions. Through pre-training and use of mixture models, show that model beats state-of-the-a art methods in terms of accuracy and generates more diverse predictions. Even on challenging task, for which any template- based models would fail, model still is able generalize the test set.
8

---

Under review as a conference paper at ICLR 2020
REFERENCES
Javier L. Baylon, Nicholas A Cilfone, Jeffrey Gulcher, and Thomas W Chittenden. Enhancing ret- rosynthetic reaction prediction with deep learning using multiscale reaction classification. Journal of chemical information and modeling, 59(2):6736688, 2019.
Connor W. Coley, Luke Rogers, William H. Green, and Klavs F. Jensen. Computer-assisted retrosyn- thesis based on molecular similarity, ACS Central Science, 3(12):1237-1245, 12 2017. doi: 10. 1021/acscentsci.7000000
org/ 10.
7500355
Connor W. Coley, William H. Green, and Klavs F. Jensen. Machine learning in computer-aided synthesis planning. Accounts of Chemical Research, 5165):1281-1289 05 2018.
doi: 10.1021/
wwt.accounts.bb00000
J. J. Corey and W. Todd Wipke. Computer-assisted design of complex organic syntheses. Science, 166(3902):178-999 192, 1969. ISSN 0036-8075. doi: 10. 10.1i1//cieence..66...00
Elias James Corey. The logic of chemical synthesis: multistep synthesis of complex carbogenic molecules (nobel lecture). Angewandte Chemie International Edition in English, 30(5):455 465,, 1991.
Jacob Devlin, Ming- Wei Chang. Kenton Lee, and Kristina Toutanova. Bert: Pre-training of deep bidirectional transformers for language understanding. arXiv preprint arXiv: /8 18/0.048805 2018.
Herbert Gelernter, J Royce Rose, and Chyouhwa Chen. Building and refining a knowledge base for synthetic organic chemistry via the methodology inductive and deductive machine learning. Journal of chemical information and computer sciences, 30(4):492-50M, 1990.
Rafael GomerrBom Jennifer N. Wei, David Duvenaud, JoséMiguel Hernández-Lobat, Ben- jamín Sánchez-Lengelingg Dennis Sheberla, Jorge aguilera-Iparragune Timothy D. Hirzel, Ryan P. Adams, and Alán Aspuru-Guzik. Automatic chemical design using data-driven continuous representation of molecules. ACS Central Science, 4(2):268-217 02 2018. doi: 00.102//aascentsccc.000557777
Xuanli He, Gholamreza Haffari, and Mohammad Norouzi. Sequence to sequence mixture model for diverse machine translation. arXiv preprint 1rX1vv181000739) 2018
Weihua Hu, Bowen Liu, Joseph Gomes, Marinka Zitiik, Percy Liang, Vijay Pande, and Jure 2019.
Leskovec. Pre-training graph neural networks. arXiv preprint
Wengong Jin, Connor W. Coley, Regina Barzilay, and Tommi S. Jaakkola. Predicting organic reac- tion outcomes with weisfeiler-lehmane network. CoRR, abs/1709.04555, 2017.
Wengong Jin, Regina Barzilay, and Tommi Jaakkola. Junction tree variational autoencoder for molecular graph generation. 02 2018a.
Wengong Jin, Kevin Yang. Regina Barzilay, and Tommi S. Jaakkola. Learning multimodal graph- to-graph translation for molecular optimization. CoRR, abs/1812.01070, 2018b.
Pavel Karpov, Guillaume Godin, and Igor Tetko. A transformer model for retrosynthesis. In International Conference Artificial Neural Networks, pp. 817-830. Springer, 2019.
Guillaume Klein, Yoon Kim, Yuntian Deng, Jean Senellart, and Alexander M. Rush. OpenNMT: Open-source toolkit for neural machine translation. In Proc. ACL, 2017. doi: 10.18653/v1/ P17-4012. URL httphttss::. sittps://doos wwt.o///////// /ttp:///...11133//////1.1.1
Matt J Kusner, Brooks Paige, and José Miguel Hermnnezz-Lbbtoo. Grammar variational autoen- coder. In Proceedings of the 34th International Conference on Machine Learning-Vone Volume 70, pp- 1945-195 1954. JMLR. org, 2017.
Yujia Li, Oriol Vinyals, Chris Dyer, Razvan Pascanu, and Peter W. Battaglia. Learning deep gener- ative models of graphs. CoRR, 0bs/1803.00322 2018.
Kangjie Lin, Youjun Xu, Jianfeng Pei, and Luhua Lai. Automatic retrosynthetic pathway planning using template-free models. arXiv preprint arXiv: (e..i/0066.9.00 2019.

---

Under review as a conference paper at ICLR 2020
Bowen Liu, Bharath Ramsundar, Prasad Kawthekar, Jade Shi, Joseph Gomes, Quang Luu Nguyen, Stephen Ho, Jack Sloane, Paul Wender, and Vijay Pande. Retrosynthetic reaction prediction using neural sequence- -e-nueeee----uuenee models. ACS Central Science, 3(10):1103-1113 2017. doi:
1cce2///cccet PMID: 29104927.
Daniel Mark Lowe. Extraction of chemical structures and reactions from the literature. PhD thesis, University of Cambridge, 2012.
Koji Satoh and Kimito Funatsu. novel approach to retrosynthetic analysis using knowledge bases derived from reaction databases. Journal of chemical information and computer sciences, 39(2): 316-325, 1999.
Philippe Schwaller, Teodoro Laino, Theophile Gaudin, Peter Bolgar, Costas Bekas, and Alpha A. Lee. Molecular Transformer A Model for Uncertainty-Caliiratee Chemical Reaction Prediction. 2019. doi: (0226494/chemmxxxx227739.9..
Marwin H. S. Segler and Mark P. Waller. Neural-symbolic machine learning for retrosynthesis and reaction prediction. Chemistry European Journal, 23(25):5966- 5971, 2017. doi: 10.1002/ chem.201605499.
Tianxiao Shen, Myle Out, Michael Auli, and Marc' Aurelio Ranzato. Mixture models for diverse machine translation: Tricks of the trade. arXiv preprint 1eXiv:1902.07000 2019.
Ashish Vaswani, Noam Shazeer, Niki Parmar, Jakob Uszkoreit, Llion Jones, Aidan N Gomez, Fukasz Kaiser, and Illia Polosukhin. Attention is all you need. In Advances in neural information processing systems, pp. 5998-6008, 2017.
Ashwin K Vijayakumar, Michael Cogswell, Ramprasath R Selvaraju, Qing Sun, Stefan Lee, David Crandall, and Dhruv Batra. Diverse beam search: Decoding diverse solutions from neural se- quence models. arXiv preprint 26X.00////0002244 2016.
David Weininger. Smiles, chemical language and information system. 1. introduction method- ology and encoding rules. Journal of chemical information and computer sciences, 28(1):31-33)) 1988.
Shuangjia Zheng, Jiahua Rao, Zhongyue Zhang, Jun Xu, and Yuedong Yang. Predicting retrosyn- thetic reaction using self-corrected transformer neural networks, 2019.
10

---

Under review as a conference paper at ICLR 2020
A RARE REACTIONS
To compute subset of the data with only rare reactions, we extracted all the templates from the entire USPTO-50K dataset, and selected the templates that occurs at most 10 times. The reactions the test set that have these templates constitute the rare reaction subset, which is around 400 examples. The results for this rare reaction subset can be found in Table 4 From this table, we see that the top-1 accuracy for the baseline model only 18.6% which is roughly 25% drop from the 42% in Table We also mention that our models improve over this baseline, showing more generalizability.
Top-1
Top-2
Top-3
Top-4
Top-5
Top-10
Base Model
18.6
23.9
26.1
26.4
28.9
31.9
Pre-trained Model
19.8
26.4
29.9
33.4
35.4
37.7
Mixture Model
16.3
24.1
28.6
30.7
32.9
39.9
Table 4: Prediction accuracies on the rare reaction test subset.
B SMILES REPRESENTATIONS
Each molecule has many different SMILES representation, because each different SMILES string just a different graph traversal over the molecule (see Figure 77. Although there is often some canonical SMILES string which is consistent, it is still completely arbitrary.
(a) SMILES: Felec2enene2enl
(b) SMILES: clncc2oo(F)nce2nl
Figure 7: A single molecule has many different SMILES representations. On the left (a) is the canonical SMILES string, and on the right (b) is another SMILES string representing the same molecule.
Additionally, because SMILES is 1-D encoding of the 2-D molecular graph, two atoms that are close in the graph may be far apart in the SMILES string, shown in Figure To correctly decode SMILES string, the decoder has to be aware of long-range dependencies. For instance, numbers in the SMILES string indicate the start and end of a cycle. The decoder has to close all cycles that starts, and at the right position, else the output SMILES will be invalid.
OH
SMILES: C(clencee1)0
Figure 8: The carbon atom (red) and the oxygen atom (blue) are neighbors on the molecular graph. However, in the SMILES string, they are far apart.

---

Under review as a conference paper at ICLR 2020
C HUMAN EVALUATION ON DIVERSITY
For human evaluation of diversity, we asked a senior (5+ years) PhD chemistry student to compare the outputs the base model versus the mixture model. The human is given the top outputs of each model and asked to rate which set is more diverse by comparing the number of reactions that differ in reaction type location of reaction on molecule. Reactions that used slightly different precursors were considered identical, and therefore does not contribute to diversity (for example, protection reactions with different protection groups are considered as one type). Lastly, the evaluation was done with the correctness of the overall reaction in mind.
12


Reviews:
[{"review_id": "rJl66yICKB", "reviewer": "AnonReviewer3", "summary": "", "questions": "", "limitations": "", "rating": 6, "confidence": null, "soundness": null, "presentation": null, "contribution": null, "strengths": "", "weaknesses": "", "quality": null, "clarity": null, "significance": null, "originality": null, "strengths_and_weaknesses": "", "was_revised": false, "final_justification": "", "rebuttal": "", "claims_and_evidence": "", "methods_and_evaluation_criteria": "", "theoretical_claims": "", "experimental_designs_or_analyses": "", "relation_to_broader_scientific_literature": "", "essential_references_not_discussed": "", "other_strengths_and_weaknesses": "", "other_comments_or_suggestions": "", "questions_for_authors": "", "summary_of_paper": "", "summary_of_recommendation": "", "technical_quality": "", "clarity_of_presentation": "", "potential_impact": "", "robotics_focus": "", "quality_of_limitations": "", "questions_for_rebuttal": "", "reasons_to_accept": "", "reasons_to_reject": "", "questions_to_authors": "", "main_review": "", "summary_of_the_paper": "", "summary_of_the_review": "", "strength_and_weaknesses": "", "limitations_and_societal_impact": "", "review_text": "This paper is very well-written and combines the state-of-the-art NLP model and the domain knowledge in retrosynthetic reaction predictions.  The authors propose pre-training models to help improve the model's generation to rare reactions. In addition, a discrete latent variable model is used in the model to encourage the model to produce a diverse set of alternative predictions.  The experiments in the paper also show the effectiveness of the two main contributions.\n\nThe main contribution of this paper is to apply the state-of-the-art Transformer model and other techniques in NLP to address the specific issues in retrosynthesis. Both the pre-training model and the mixture model are combining the specific domain knowledge to improve the generalization and diversity of retrosynthesis. There is not a huge algorithm novelty for the methods proposed in this paper, but they can well address the domain issues and improve the performance.\n\nMy only concern is that the baseline model compared in the paper is Schwaller's work. I am not pretty sure if this baseline achieves state-of-the-art performance. It would be very interesting to see more comparisons with other state-of-the-art \n work.\n\n\n", "extra_scores": {"experience_assessment": "I do not know much about this area.", "review_assessment:_thoroughness_in_paper_reading": "I read the paper thoroughly.", "review_assessment:_checking_correctness_of_experiments": "I carefully checked the experiments.", "review_assessment:_checking_correctness_of_derivations_and_theory": "I assessed the sensibility of the derivations and theory."}, "extra_text": {}}, {"review_id": "HkeLifuQ5B", "reviewer": "AnonReviewer2", "summary": "", "questions": "", "limitations": "", "rating": 1, "confidence": null, "soundness": null, "presentation": null, "contribution": null, "strengths": "", "weaknesses": "", "quality": null, "clarity": null, "significance": null, "originality": null, "strengths_and_weaknesses": "", "was_revised": false, "final_justification": "", "rebuttal": "", "claims_and_evidence": "", "methods_and_evaluation_criteria": "", "theoretical_claims": "", "experimental_designs_or_analyses": "", "relation_to_broader_scientific_literature": "", "essential_references_not_discussed": "", "other_strengths_and_weaknesses": "", "other_comments_or_suggestions": "", "questions_for_authors": "", "summary_of_paper": "", "summary_of_recommendation": "", "technical_quality": "", "clarity_of_presentation": "", "potential_impact": "", "robotics_focus": "", "quality_of_limitations": "", "questions_for_rebuttal": "", "reasons_to_accept": "", "reasons_to_reject": "", "questions_to_authors": "", "main_review": "", "summary_of_the_paper": "", "summary_of_the_review": "", "strength_and_weaknesses": "", "limitations_and_societal_impact": "", "review_text": "The authors present an approach to improve performance for retro-synthesis of chemical targets in a seq2seq setting using transformers. The authors have encouraging results and the paper was fairly easy to read and follow. However there are a variety of concerns that the authors need to address:\n\nThe technical contributions in this paper are somewhat thin. The main contributions are data augmentation techniques, pre-training and a mixture model that seems to improve performance on the USPTO-50K dataset. The novelty is quite low and it’s not clear if this will transfer to another domain. The impact is also low as the pre-training techniques using bond breaking and template-based are specific to this problem task. Additionally, mixture models for encouraging diversity is a simple instance of ensembling.\n\nUsing deep learning to this application area is also not novel. This paper largely builds upon previous work with Transformers from Schwaller et. al and Karpov et. al. \n\nOther clarifications/issues:\n - The experimental results are based only on the USPTO dataset. It’s unclear how significant the results are. The authors can consider using diverse datasets or applying their techniques to another application domain to bolster their claims.\n - Table 3, lists the average number of unique reactions classes. The authors say “ … we predict the reaction class for every output of our models… “ . It’s not clear how it makes sense to calculate diversity when there’s no ground truth available for determining if the predicted output is a valid synthesis for the target. To say this another way, what good is diversity if the prediction is incorrect?\n - Table 3, lists human eval results. The details here seem quite vague. How does a human determine something to be more diverse? What is the rubric they use? How qualified is the human in being able to judge this task?\n - Figure 6 does not have a color scale.\n", "extra_scores": {"experience_assessment": "I have published in this field for several years.", "review_assessment:_thoroughness_in_paper_reading": "I read the paper at least twice and used my best judgement in assessing the paper.", "review_assessment:_checking_correctness_of_experiments": "I carefully checked the experiments.", "review_assessment:_checking_correctness_of_derivations_and_theory": "I assessed the sensibility of the derivations and theory."}, "extra_text": {}}, {"review_id": "BkxFpvFMqS", "reviewer": "AnonReviewer1", "summary": "", "questions": "", "limitations": "", "rating": 6, "confidence": null, "soundness": null, "presentation": null, "contribution": null, "strengths": "", "weaknesses": "", "quality": null, "clarity": null, "significance": null, "originality": null, "strengths_and_weaknesses": "", "was_revised": false, "final_justification": "", "rebuttal": "", "claims_and_evidence": "", "methods_and_evaluation_criteria": "", "theoretical_claims": "", "experimental_designs_or_analyses": "", "relation_to_broader_scientific_literature": "", "essential_references_not_discussed": "", "other_strengths_and_weaknesses": "", "other_comments_or_suggestions": "", "questions_for_authors": "", "summary_of_paper": "", "summary_of_recommendation": "", "technical_quality": "", "clarity_of_presentation": "", "potential_impact": "", "robotics_focus": "", "quality_of_limitations": "", "questions_for_rebuttal": "", "reasons_to_accept": "", "reasons_to_reject": "", "questions_to_authors": "", "main_review": "", "summary_of_the_paper": "", "summary_of_the_review": "", "strength_and_weaknesses": "", "limitations_and_societal_impact": "", "review_text": "Given a target compound, the authors suggest a method to predict likely chemical reactants to produce the target. The authors provide a transformer based model to predict the reactants. Existing methods do not generalize well for rare reactions and the training data has only one reactant set for each target even though that may not be the only way to synthesize the compound. To solve this problem, the authors use a pretraining method similar to BERT. Instead of just using token masking, they provide alternate proxy decompositions for a target molecule by randomly removing bond types that are likely to break and by transforming the target based on known templates.\n\nThis is a well written paper with good baselines.They use multiple techniques that are both domain specific (data augmentation) as well as methods from NLP adapted for this task. The experiments are carefully designed and show that both pretraining and data augmentation helps. Overall, I think the community will benefit from this work.", "extra_scores": {"experience_assessment": "I have published one or two papers in this area.", "review_assessment:_thoroughness_in_paper_reading": "I read the paper at least twice and used my best judgement in assessing the paper.", "review_assessment:_checking_correctness_of_experiments": "I carefully checked the experiments.", "review_assessment:_checking_correctness_of_derivations_and_theory": "N/A"}, "extra_text": {}}]

Author rebuttal:

Meta-review: The authors present a new approach to improve performance for retro-synthesis using a seq2seq model, achieving significant improvement over the baseline. There are a number of lingering questions regarding the significance and impact of this work. Hence, my recommendation is to reject. 
Decision: Reject