chemagent
MADD: Multi-Agent Drug Discovery Orchestra
Solovev, Gleb V., Zhidkovskaya, Alina B., Orlova, Anastasia, Gubina, Nina, Vepreva, Anastasia, Golovinskii, Rodion, Tonkii, Ilya, Dubrovsky, Ivan, Gurev, Ivan, Gilemkhanov, Dmitry, Chistiakov, Denis, Aliev, Timur A., Poddiakov, Ivan, Zubkova, Galina, Skorb, Ekaterina V., Vinogradov, Vladimir, Boukhanovsky, Alexander, Nikitin, Nikolay, Dmitrenko, Andrei, Kalyuzhnaya, Anna, Savchenko, Andrey
Hit identification is a central challenge in early drug discovery, traditionally requiring substantial experimental resources. Recent advances in artificial intelligence, particularly large language models (LLMs), have enabled virtual screening methods that reduce costs and improve efficiency. However, the growing complexity of these tools has limited their accessibility to wet-lab researchers. Multi-agent systems offer a promising solution by combining the interpretability of LLMs with the precision of specialized models and tools. In this work, we present MADD, a multi-agent system that builds and executes customized hit identification pipelines from natural language queries. MADD employs four coordinated agents to handle key subtasks in de novo compound generation and screening. We evaluate MADD across seven drug discovery cases and demonstrate its superior performance compared to existing LLM-based solutions. Using MADD, we pioneer the application of AI-first drug design to five biological targets and release the identified hit molecules. Finally, we introduce a new benchmark of query-molecule pairs and docking scores for over three million compounds to contribute to the agentic future of drug design.
ChemAgent: Self-updating Library in Large Language Models Improves Chemical Reasoning
Tang, Xiangru, Hu, Tianyu, Ye, Muyang, Shao, Yanjun, Yin, Xunjian, Ouyang, Siru, Zhou, Wangchunshu, Lu, Pan, Zhang, Zhuosheng, Zhao, Yilun, Cohan, Arman, Gerstein, Mark
Chemical reasoning usually involves complex, multi-step processes that demand precise calculations, where even minor errors can lead to cascading failures. Furthermore, large language models (LLMs) encounter difficulties handling domain-specific formulas, executing reasoning steps accurately, and integrating code effectively when tackling chemical reasoning tasks. To address these challenges, we present ChemAgent, a novel framework designed to improve the performance of LLMs through a dynamic, self-updating library. This library is developed by decomposing chemical tasks into sub-tasks and compiling these sub-tasks into a structured collection that can be referenced for future queries. Then, when presented with a new problem, ChemAgent retrieves and refines pertinent information from the library, which we call memory, facilitating effective task decomposition and the generation of solutions. Our method designs three types of memory and a library-enhanced reasoning component, enabling LLMs to improve over time through experience. Experimental results on four chemical reasoning datasets from SciBench demonstrate that ChemAgent achieves performance gains of up to 46% (GPT-4), significantly outperforming existing methods. Our findings suggest substantial potential for future applications, including tasks such as drug discovery and materials science. Our code can be found at https://github.com/gersteinlab/chemagent
Tooling or Not Tooling? The Impact of Tools on Language Agents for Chemistry Problem Solving
Yu, Botao, Baker, Frazier N., Chen, Ziru, Herb, Garrett, Gou, Boyu, Adu-Ampratwum, Daniel, Ning, Xia, Sun, Huan
To enhance large language models (LLMs) for chemistry problem solving, several LLM-based agents augmented with tools have been proposed, such as ChemCrow and Coscientist. However, their evaluations are narrow in scope, leaving a large gap in understanding the benefits of tools across diverse chemistry tasks. To bridge this gap, we develop ChemAgent, an enhanced chemistry agent over ChemCrow, and conduct a comprehensive evaluation of its performance on both specialized chemistry tasks and general chemistry questions. Surprisingly, ChemAgent does not consistently outperform its base LLMs without tools. Our error analysis with a chemistry expert suggests that: For specialized chemistry tasks, such as synthesis prediction, we should augment agents with specialized tools; however, for general chemistry questions like those in exams, agents' ability to reason correctly with chemistry knowledge matters more, and tool augmentation does not always help.