353 lines
9.8 KiB
Markdown
353 lines
9.8 KiB
Markdown
# Molecular Generation
|
||
|
||
## Overview
|
||
|
||
Molecular generation involves creating novel molecular structures with desired properties. TorchDrug supports both unconditional generation (exploring chemical space) and conditional generation (optimizing for specific properties).
|
||
|
||
## Task Types
|
||
|
||
### AutoregressiveGeneration
|
||
|
||
Generates molecules step-by-step by sequentially adding atoms and bonds. This approach enables fine-grained control and property optimization during generation.
|
||
|
||
**Key Features:**
|
||
- Sequential atom-by-bond construction
|
||
- Supports property optimization during generation
|
||
- Can incorporate chemical validity constraints
|
||
- Enables multi-objective optimization
|
||
|
||
**Generation Strategies:**
|
||
1. **Beam Search**: Keep top-k candidates at each step
|
||
2. **Sampling**: Probabilistic selection for diversity
|
||
3. **Greedy**: Always select highest probability action
|
||
|
||
**Property Optimization:**
|
||
- Reward shaping based on desired properties
|
||
- Real-time constraint satisfaction
|
||
- Multi-objective balancing (e.g., potency + drug-likeness)
|
||
|
||
### GCPNGeneration (Graph Convolutional Policy Network)
|
||
|
||
Uses reinforcement learning to generate molecules optimized for specific properties.
|
||
|
||
**Components:**
|
||
1. **Policy Network**: Decides which action to take (add atom, add bond)
|
||
2. **Reward Function**: Evaluates generated molecule quality
|
||
3. **Training**: Reinforcement learning with policy gradient
|
||
|
||
**Advantages:**
|
||
- Direct optimization of non-differentiable objectives
|
||
- Can incorporate complex domain knowledge
|
||
- Balances exploration and exploitation
|
||
|
||
**Applications:**
|
||
- Drug design with specific targets
|
||
- Material discovery with property constraints
|
||
- Multi-objective molecular optimization
|
||
|
||
## Generative Models
|
||
|
||
### GraphAutoregressiveFlow
|
||
|
||
Normalizing flow model for molecular generation with exact likelihood computation.
|
||
|
||
**Architecture:**
|
||
- Coupling layers transform simple distribution to complex molecular distribution
|
||
- Invertible transformations enable density estimation
|
||
- Supports conditional generation
|
||
|
||
**Key Features:**
|
||
- Exact likelihood computation (vs. VAE's approximate likelihood)
|
||
- Stable training (vs. GAN's adversarial training)
|
||
- Efficient sampling through invertible transformations
|
||
- Can generate molecules with specified properties
|
||
|
||
**Training:**
|
||
- Maximum likelihood on molecule dataset
|
||
- Optional property prediction head for conditional generation
|
||
- Typically trained on ZINC or QM9
|
||
|
||
**Use Cases:**
|
||
- Generating diverse drug-like molecules
|
||
- Interpolation between known molecules
|
||
- Density estimation for molecular space
|
||
|
||
## Generation Workflows
|
||
|
||
### Unconditional Generation
|
||
|
||
Generate diverse molecules without specific property targets.
|
||
|
||
**Workflow:**
|
||
1. Train generative model on molecule dataset (e.g., ZINC250k)
|
||
2. Sample from learned distribution
|
||
3. Post-process for validity and uniqueness
|
||
4. Evaluate diversity metrics
|
||
|
||
**Evaluation Metrics:**
|
||
- **Validity**: Percentage of chemically valid molecules
|
||
- **Uniqueness**: Percentage of unique molecules among valid
|
||
- **Novelty**: Percentage not in training set
|
||
- **Diversity**: Internal diversity using fingerprint similarity
|
||
|
||
### Conditional Generation
|
||
|
||
Generate molecules optimized for specific properties.
|
||
|
||
**Property Targets:**
|
||
- **Drug-likeness**: LogP, QED, Lipinski's rule of five
|
||
- **Synthesizability**: SA score, retrosynthesis feasibility
|
||
- **Bioactivity**: Predicted IC50, binding affinity
|
||
- **ADMET**: Absorption, distribution, metabolism, excretion, toxicity
|
||
- **Multi-objective**: Balance multiple properties simultaneously
|
||
|
||
**Workflow:**
|
||
1. Define reward function combining property objectives
|
||
2. Train GCPN or condition flow model on properties
|
||
3. Generate molecules with desired property ranges
|
||
4. Validate generated molecules (in silico → wet lab)
|
||
|
||
### Scaffold-Based Generation
|
||
|
||
Generate molecules around a fixed scaffold or core structure.
|
||
|
||
**Applications:**
|
||
- Lead optimization keeping core pharmacophore
|
||
- R-group enumeration for SAR studies
|
||
- Fragment linking and growing
|
||
|
||
**Approaches:**
|
||
- Mask scaffold during training
|
||
- Condition generation on scaffold
|
||
- Post-generation grafting
|
||
|
||
### Fragment-Based Generation
|
||
|
||
Build molecules from validated fragments.
|
||
|
||
**Benefits:**
|
||
- Ensures drug-like substructures
|
||
- Reduces search space
|
||
- Incorporates medicinal chemistry knowledge
|
||
|
||
**Methods:**
|
||
- Fragment library as building blocks
|
||
- Vocabulary-based generation
|
||
- Fragment linking with learned linkers
|
||
|
||
## Property Optimization Strategies
|
||
|
||
### Single-Objective Optimization
|
||
|
||
Maximize or minimize a single property (e.g., binding affinity).
|
||
|
||
**Approach:**
|
||
- Define scalar reward function
|
||
- Use GCPN with RL training
|
||
- Generate and rank candidates
|
||
|
||
**Challenges:**
|
||
- May sacrifice other important properties
|
||
- Risk of adversarial examples (valid but non-drug-like)
|
||
- Need constraints on drug-likeness
|
||
|
||
### Multi-Objective Optimization
|
||
|
||
Balance multiple competing objectives (e.g., potency, selectivity, synthesizability).
|
||
|
||
**Weighting Approaches:**
|
||
- **Linear combination**: w1×prop1 + w2×prop2 + ...
|
||
- **Pareto optimization**: Find non-dominated solutions
|
||
- **Constraint satisfaction**: Threshold on secondary objectives
|
||
|
||
**Example Objectives:**
|
||
- High binding affinity (target)
|
||
- Low binding affinity (off-targets)
|
||
- High synthesizability (SA score)
|
||
- Drug-like properties (QED)
|
||
- Low molecular weight
|
||
|
||
**Workflow:**
|
||
```python
|
||
from torchdrug import tasks
|
||
|
||
# Define multi-objective reward
|
||
def reward_function(mol):
|
||
affinity_score = predict_binding(mol)
|
||
druglikeness = calculate_qed(mol)
|
||
synthesizability = sa_score(mol)
|
||
|
||
# Weighted combination
|
||
reward = 0.5 * affinity_score + 0.3 * druglikeness + 0.2 * (1 - synthesizability)
|
||
return reward
|
||
|
||
# GCPN task with custom reward
|
||
task = tasks.GCPNGeneration(
|
||
model,
|
||
reward_function=reward_function,
|
||
criterion="ppo" # Proximal policy optimization
|
||
)
|
||
```
|
||
|
||
### Constraint-Based Generation
|
||
|
||
Generate molecules satisfying hard constraints.
|
||
|
||
**Common Constraints:**
|
||
- Molecular weight range
|
||
- LogP range
|
||
- Number of rotatable bonds
|
||
- Ring count limits
|
||
- Substructure inclusion/exclusion
|
||
- Synthetic accessibility threshold
|
||
|
||
**Implementation:**
|
||
- Validity checking during generation
|
||
- Early stopping for invalid molecules
|
||
- Penalty terms in reward function
|
||
|
||
## Training Considerations
|
||
|
||
### Dataset Selection
|
||
|
||
**ZINC (Drug-like compounds):**
|
||
- ZINC250k: 250,000 compounds
|
||
- ZINC2M: 2 million compounds
|
||
- Pre-filtered for drug-likeness
|
||
- Good for drug discovery applications
|
||
|
||
**QM9 (Small organic molecules):**
|
||
- 133,885 molecules
|
||
- Includes quantum properties
|
||
- Good for property prediction models
|
||
|
||
**ChEMBL (Bioactive molecules):**
|
||
- Millions of bioactive compounds
|
||
- Activity data available
|
||
- Target-specific generation
|
||
|
||
**Custom Datasets:**
|
||
- Focus on specific chemical space
|
||
- Include expert knowledge
|
||
- Domain-specific constraints
|
||
|
||
### Data Augmentation
|
||
|
||
**SMILES Augmentation:**
|
||
- Generate multiple SMILES for same molecule
|
||
- Helps model learn canonical representations
|
||
- Improves robustness
|
||
|
||
**Graph Augmentation:**
|
||
- Random node/edge masking
|
||
- Subgraph sampling
|
||
- Motif substitution
|
||
|
||
### Model Architecture Choices
|
||
|
||
**For Small Molecules (<30 atoms):**
|
||
- Simpler architectures sufficient
|
||
- Faster training and generation
|
||
- GCN or GIN backbone
|
||
|
||
**For Drug-like Molecules:**
|
||
- Deeper architectures (4-6 layers)
|
||
- Attention mechanisms help
|
||
- Consider molecular fingerprints
|
||
|
||
**For Macrocycles/Polymers:**
|
||
- Handle larger graphs
|
||
- Ring closure mechanisms important
|
||
- Long-range dependencies
|
||
|
||
## Validation and Filtering
|
||
|
||
### In Silico Validation
|
||
|
||
**Chemical Validity:**
|
||
- Valence rules
|
||
- Aromaticity rules
|
||
- Charge neutrality
|
||
- Stable substructures
|
||
|
||
**Drug-likeness Filters:**
|
||
- Lipinski's rule of five
|
||
- Veber's rules
|
||
- PAINS filters (pan-assay interference compounds)
|
||
- BRENK filters (toxic/reactive substructures)
|
||
|
||
**Synthesizability:**
|
||
- SA score (synthetic accessibility)
|
||
- Retrosynthesis prediction
|
||
- Commercial availability of precursors
|
||
|
||
**Property Prediction:**
|
||
- ADMET properties
|
||
- Toxicity prediction
|
||
- Off-target binding
|
||
- Metabolic stability
|
||
|
||
### Ranking and Selection
|
||
|
||
**Criteria:**
|
||
1. Predicted target affinity
|
||
2. Drug-likeness score
|
||
3. Synthesizability
|
||
4. Novelty (dissimilarity to known actives)
|
||
5. Diversity (within generated set)
|
||
6. Predicted ADMET properties
|
||
|
||
**Selection Strategies:**
|
||
- Pareto frontier selection
|
||
- Weighted scoring
|
||
- Clustering and representative selection
|
||
- Active learning for wet lab validation
|
||
|
||
## Best Practices
|
||
|
||
1. **Start Simple**: Begin with unconditional generation, then add constraints
|
||
2. **Validate Chemistry**: Always check for valid molecules and drug-likeness
|
||
3. **Diverse Training Data**: Use large, diverse datasets for better generalization
|
||
4. **Multi-Objective**: Consider multiple properties from the start
|
||
5. **Iterative Refinement**: Generate → validate → retrain with feedback
|
||
6. **Domain Expert Review**: Consult medicinal chemists before synthesis
|
||
7. **Benchmark**: Compare against known actives and random samples
|
||
8. **Synthesizability**: Prioritize molecules that can actually be made
|
||
9. **Explainability**: Understand why model generates certain structures
|
||
10. **Wet Lab Validation**: Ultimately validate promising candidates experimentally
|
||
|
||
## Common Applications
|
||
|
||
### Drug Discovery
|
||
- Lead generation for novel targets
|
||
- Lead optimization around active scaffolds
|
||
- Bioisostere replacement
|
||
- Fragment elaboration
|
||
|
||
### Materials Science
|
||
- Polymer design with target properties
|
||
- Catalyst discovery
|
||
- Energy storage materials
|
||
- Photovoltaic materials
|
||
|
||
### Chemical Biology
|
||
- Probe molecule design
|
||
- Degrader (PROTAC) design
|
||
- Molecular glue discovery
|
||
|
||
## Integration with Other Tools
|
||
|
||
**Docking:**
|
||
- Generate molecules → Dock to target → Retrain with docking scores
|
||
|
||
**Retrosynthesis:**
|
||
- Filter generated molecules by synthetic accessibility
|
||
- Plan synthesis routes for top candidates
|
||
|
||
**Property Prediction:**
|
||
- Use trained property prediction models as reward functions
|
||
- Multi-task learning with generation and prediction
|
||
|
||
**Active Learning:**
|
||
- Generate candidates → Predict properties → Synthesize best → Retrain
|