Re:AI in drug discovery is overhyped: examples from AstraZen...
by mostafab on Friday January 05, 2018 @07:15PM
(#16082926)
I am not sure to fully understand your remark, but if you have a benchmark graph convolutions vs. char-CNN, it would be great to write your result and post it on Arxiv. Pande will be interested ;) The problem is not with the theoretical motivation, but with the empirical confirmation.
I also agree that there are many ways to work through the perfect discriminator problem for ORGAN. But it remains to be done (afaik).
Re:AI in drug discovery is overhyped: examples from AstraZen...
by frisco on Friday January 05, 2018 @10:39PM
(#16083705)
I misread char-CNN as char-RNN in the linked article. I don’t know of results that compare graph convolutions to char-CNN. If a comparison were to be made, what metrics should it focus on?
I did a project a year or so ago to reimplement one of Aspuru-Guzik's papers, a variational autoencoder, (https://github.com/maxhodak/keras-molecules) and when I did that I compared to char-RNN and the VAE did get much more interesting results. I also saw results from other people around that time showing that using graph convolutions on the front end instead of one-hot encoded SMILES strings was even better.
Also, as for OP's objection about GANs not working because it's a "perfect discriminator," this is an obvious result that becomes apparent after spending 20 seconds with the problem. (Eg, this thread here: https://github.com/maxhodak/keras-molecules/issues/55) I haven't read the Harvard paper referenced but I'd be absolutely shocked if this was lost on them. There are definitely ways to work through it.