Skip to main content

A.I. finds non-infringing ways to copy drugs pharma spends billions developing

Drug companies spend billions developing and protecting their trademark pharmaceuticals. Could artificial intelligence be about to shake things up? In a breakthrough development, researchers have demonstrated an A.I. which can find new methods for producing existing drugs in a way that doesn’t infringe on existing patents.

Called Chematica, the software platform does something called “retrosynthesis,” similar to the kind of reverse engineering that takes place when an engineer dissects an existing product to see how it works. In the case of Chematica, this process is based on a deep knowledge of how chemical interactions take place. It has around 70,000 synthetic chemistry “rules” coded into its system, along with thousands of additional auxiliary rules prescribing when particular reactions occur and with which molecules they’re compatible. An algorithm then inspects the massive number of possible reaction sequences in order to find another way to the same finish line.

“They effectively walk on enormous trees of synthetic possibilities, so it is a graph search problem they are trying to solve,” Bartosz Grzybowski at the Ulsan National Institute of Science and Technology (UNIST) in South Korea, told Digital Trends. “Akin to chess, every synthetic move these algorithms make is evaluated by scoring functions, which we developed over the years to tell the program whether it is navigating in the right synthetic direction.’”

The analogy to playing chess isn’t a frivolous one. Over the almost two-decades (!) that this work has been ongoing, the researchers have shown that the numbers of “positions” the A.I. must evaluate is similar to the number of possibilities that chess programs have to scrutinize.

“In principle, one can always argue that a human expert would also design this or that synthetic route,” Grzybowski continued. “That is absolutely possible given adequate amount of time, but Chematica does the job on typical timescales of [just a few minutes to one hour]. It’s like trying to multiple 468,383,83 x 25,405 with paper and pencil versus using a calculator.”

As exciting as the work is, however, don’t expect this to be anything that brings down the world of big pharma — if that’s what you’re hoping for. Chematica, which was bought by pharma giant MilliporeSigma in 2017, is more likely to be used to help these companies better protect their intellectual property.

[In our latest] paper we tackled three blockbuster drugs, very heavily guarded by patents — and yet a ‘stupid’ computer managed to find synthetic bypasses,” Grzybowski said. “Now, what if your competitors were to use such a tool? Could they bust your patents? Should you also use the tool? What if they come up with a better version? These sorts of question might point to an arms race in developing similar and competing software solutions.”

Editors' Recommendations

Luke Dormehl
I'm a UK-based tech writer covering Cool Tech at Digital Trends. I've also written for Fast Company, Wired, the Guardian…
Algorithmic architecture: Should we let A.I. design buildings for us?
Generated Venice cities

Designs iterate over time. Architecture designed and built in 1921 won’t look the same as a building from 1971 or from 2021. Trends change, materials evolve, and issues like sustainability gain importance, among other factors. But what if this evolution wasn’t just about the types of buildings architects design, but was, in fact, key to how they design? That’s the promise of evolutionary algorithms as a design tool.

While designers have long since used tools like Computer Aided Design (CAD) to help conceptualize projects, proponents of generative design want to go several steps further. They want to use algorithms that mimic evolutionary processes inside a computer to help design buildings from the ground up. And, at least when it comes to houses, the results are pretty darn interesting.
Generative design
Celestino Soddu has been working with evolutionary algorithms for longer than most people working today have been using computers. A contemporary Italian architect and designer now in his mid-70s, Soddu became interested in the technology’s potential impact on design back in the days of the Apple II. What interested him was the potential for endlessly riffing on a theme. Or as Soddu, who is also professor of generative design at the Polytechnic University of Milan in Italy, told Digital Trends, he liked the idea of “opening the door to endless variation.”

Read more
Emotion-sensing A.I. is here, and it could be in your next job interview
man speaking into phone

I vividly remember witnessing speech recognition technology in action for the first time. It was in the mid-1990s on a Macintosh computer in my grade school classroom. The science fiction writer Arthur C. Clarke once wrote that “any sufficiently advanced technology is indistinguishable from magic” -- and this was magical all right, seeing spoken words appearing on the screen without anyone having to physically hammer them out on a keyboard.

Jump forward another couple of decades, and now a large (and rapidly growing) number of our devices feature A.I. assistants like Apple’s Siri or Amazon’s Alexa. These tools, built using the latest artificial intelligence technology, aren’t simply able to transcribe words -- they are able to make sense of their contents to carry out actions.

Read more
Language supermodel: How GPT-3 is quietly ushering in the A.I. revolution
Profile of head on computer chip artificial intelligence.

OpenAI’s GPT-2 text-generating algorithm was once considered too dangerous to release. Then it got released -- and the world kept on turning.

In retrospect, the comparatively small GPT-2 language model (a puny 1.5 billion parameters) looks paltry next to its sequel, GPT-3, which boasts a massive 175 billion parameters, was trained on 45 TB of text data, and cost a reported $12 million (at least) to build.

Read more