4.7 Review

A Perspective on Explanations of Molecular Prediction Models

Journal

JOURNAL OF CHEMICAL THEORY AND COMPUTATION
Volume 19, Issue 8, Pages 2149-2160

Publisher

AMER CHEMICAL SOC
DOI: 10.1021/acs.jctc.2c01235

Keywords

-

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Chemists are skeptical about using deep learning (DL) for decision making due to lack of interpretability in black-box models. Explainable artificial intelligence (XAI) addresses this issue by providing tools to interpret DL models and predictions. This article reviews XAI principles in chemistry, introduces emerging methods, and focuses on our group's methods and their applications in predicting solubility, blood-brain barrier permeability, and scent of molecules. XAI methods like chemical counterfactuals and descriptor explanations can explain DL predictions and provide insights into structure-property relationships. The two-step process of developing a black-box model and explaining predictions can uncover structure-property relationships.
Chemists can be skeptical in using deep learning (DL) in decision making, due to the lack of interpretability in black-box models. Explainable artificial intelligence (XAI) is a branch of artificial intelligence (AI) which addresses this drawback by providing tools to interpret DL models and their predictions. We review the principles of XAI in the domain of chemistry and emerging methods for creating and evaluating explanations. Then, we focus on methods developed by our group and their applications in predicting solubility, blood-brain barrier permeability, and the scent of molecules. We show that XAI methods like chemical counterfactuals and descriptor explanations can explain DL predictions while giving insight into structure-property relationships. Finally, we discuss how a two-step process of developing a black-box model and explaining predictions can uncover structure-property relationships.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.7
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available