ArticleAdvanced science (Weinheim, Baden-Wurttemberg, Germany)2026
Revisiting Target-Aware de novo Molecular Generation with TarPass: Between Rational Design and Texas Sharpshooter.
Article in Advanced science (Weinheim, Baden-Wurttemberg, Germany), 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- Evaluating AI-Generated Molecules for Drug Discovery: From Generic Metrics to Translational Readiness.International journal of molecular sciences · 2026Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
12 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Target-aware molecular generation models hold promise for drug discovery, but it remains unclear whether they genuinely exploit target information or merely resemble the Texas Sharpshooter fallacy by retrospectively rationalizing outputs. To address this, we introduce TarPass, a benchmark comprising a curated dataset of 18 well-studied targets with expert-annotated key interactions and experimentally validated active compounds, enabling fair evaluation of target-aware de novo molecular generation models. We assessed 15 representative models across three paradigms: non-3D, 3D in situ, and optimization-based, considering protein-ligand interactions (PLIs), molecular plausibility, and drug-likeness. Results show that 3D in situ models have a modest average advantage in predicted PLIs. However, many fail to outperform random sampling. Non-3D models, benefiting from broader pretraining, generate more drug-like and synthesizable molecules but exhibit weaker target specificity. Optimization-based methods effectively redirect outputs toward favorable chemical regions for single properties, often at the expense of others, for example by reducing compliance with Lipinski's rules. Integrating these insights, we propose a multi-tier virtual screening workflow for target-aware molecular generation as a post-processing strategy to enrich molecules with improved PLIs and plausibility. Overall, this study highlights the limitations of current models in capturing fine-grained target-specific constraints and provides a standardized framework for future structure-based drug design.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What Socratic holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the Socratic graph.