4.6 Article

InChI version 1.06: now more than 99.99% reliable

期刊

JOURNAL OF CHEMINFORMATICS
卷 13, 期 1, 页码 -

出版社

BMC
DOI: 10.1186/s13321-021-00517-z

关键词

InChI; InChIKey; PubChem; RInChI

资金

  1. InChI Trust
  2. Intramural Research Program of the National Library of Medicine, National Institutes of Health

向作者/读者索取更多资源

The software for the IUPAC Chemical Identifier, InChI, is highly reliable and has been upgraded to version 1.06 with significant new features including support for pseudo-element atoms and improved description of polymers. Research results show that the accuracy of version 1.05 was 99.996% and version 1.06 represents a step closer to perfection, with few applications needing changes as a result of the upgrade.
The software for the IUPAC Chemical Identifier, InChI, is extraordinarily reliable. It has been tested on large databases around the world, and has proved itself to be an essential tool in the handling and integration of large chemical databases. InChI version 1.05 was released in January 2017 and version 1.06 in December 2020. In this paper, we report on the current state of the InChI Software, the details of the improvements in the v1.06 release, and the results of a test of the InChI run on PubChem, a database of more than a hundred million molecules. The upgrade introduces significant new features, including support for pseudo-element atoms and an improved description of polymers. We expect that few, if any, applications using the standard InChI will need to change as a result of the changes in version 1.06. Numerical instability was discovered for 0.002% of this database, and a small number of other molecules were discovered for which the algorithm did not run smoothly. On the basis of PubChem data, we can demonstrate that InChI version 1.05 was 99.996% accurate, and InChI version 1.06 represents a step closer to perfection. Finally, we look forward to future releases and extensions for the InChI Chemical identifier.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.6
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据