Abstract:The discovery of new catalysts is essential for the design of new and more efficient chemical processes in order to transition to a sustainable future. We introduce an AI-guided computational screening framework unifying linguistic reasoning with quantum-chemistry based feedback from 3D atomistic representations. Our approach formulates catalyst discovery as an uncertain environment where an agent actively searches for highly effective catalysts via the iterative combination of large language model (LLM)-derived hypotheses and atomistic graph neural network (GNN)-derived feedback. Identified catalysts in intermediate search steps undergo structural evaluation based on spatial orientation, reaction pathways, and stability. Scoring functions based on adsorption energies and barriers steer the exploration in the LLM's knowledge space toward energetically favorable, high-efficiency catalysts. We introduce planning methods that automatically guide the exploration without human input, providing competitive performance against expert-enumerated chemical descriptor-based implementations. By integrating language-guided reasoning with computational chemistry feedback, our work pioneers AI-accelerated, trustworthy catalyst discovery.
Abstract:Discovering novel catalysts requires complex reasoning involving multiple chemical properties and resultant trade-offs, leading to a combinatorial growth in the search space. While large language models (LLM) have demonstrated novel capabilities for chemistry through complex instruction following capabilities and high quality reasoning, a goal-driven combinatorial search using LLMs has not been explored in detail. In this work, we present a Monte Carlo Tree Search-based approach that improves beyond state-of-the-art chain-of-thought prompting variants to augment scientific reasoning. We introduce two new reasoning datasets: 1) a curation of computational chemistry simulations, and 2) diverse questions written by catalysis researchers for reasoning about novel chemical conversion processes. We improve over the best baseline by 25.8\% and find that our approach can augment scientist's reasoning and discovery process with novel insights.