Poster #P16




Guessing coordinates for pathway guessing

Maike Mücke, Ricardo A. Mata



The exploration of reaction pathways lies at the heart of understanding chemical processes, with applications ranging from catalysis to drug design. A reaction path in its fundamental form describes the rearrangement of atoms between reactant and product state along a connected set of structures, providing insight into the kinetics of the reaction. With the advancement of computational hardware and quantum chemical methods in the recent years, computational and data-driven reaction network discovery has become accessible, revolutionizing the way chemical space is explored, thus accelerating the development of novel molecules and materials [1,2,3]. However, at the heart of this endeavour still lies the efficient generation of minimum energy paths (MEP), which are often needed a priori as feedstock for data driven methods. It has been shown that the MEP generated by common use gradient-based methods such as the Nudge Elastic Band (NEB)[4] or string[5] method heavily rely on the initial path and the coordinate space chosen[6]. In this regard we present a systematic and broad comparison of representations used in MEP generators, as well as a diverse dataset of benchmark reactions for reaction-exploration algorithms. Our dataset shows large chemical diversity, containing molecules with up to 21 heavy (non-hydrogen) atoms from the reaction space spanned by C, H,O, N, S, P, B, F, Cl and Br. By including larger and chemically more diverse molecules than previously established datasets [7,8] we provide an opportunity to test the robustness and predictive capabilities of established methodologies.


  1. Duan, C., Du, Y., Jia, H., Kulik, H. J., Nat Comput Sci 2023, 3, 1045–1055.
  2. Schreiner, M., et al., {"Mach. Learn."=>"Sci. Technol."} 2022, 3, 18962.
  3. Türtscher, P. L., Reiher, M., J. Chem. Inf. Model. 2023 63 (1), 147-160.
  4. Sheppard, D., Terekk, R., Henkelmann, G., J. Chem. Phys. 2008, 128, 134106.
  5. Behn, A., et al., J. Chem. Phys. 2011, 135 (22), 224108.
  6. Zhu, X., et al., J. Chem. Phys. 2019, 150 (16), 164103.
  7. Schreiner, M., Bhowmik, A., Vegge, T. et al., Sci Data 2022, 9, 779.
  8. Zhao, Q., Vaddadi, S.M., Woulfe, M. et al., Sci Data 2023, 10, 145.





 Maike Mücke

  •   Georg-August University Goettingen