Coverage Before Control: Route-Instruction Grounding and Steering for Controllable Retrosynthesis
Not on the map. Why?
Abstract (arXiv)
Single-step retrosynthesis models are commonly evaluated by their ability to recover recorded reactions. In practice, chemists may need to choose among several precursor sets for the same product, for example to preserve a particular motif. Recovering a recorded answer alone does not establish this ability to follow a preference. Satisfying such requests requires both coverage of relevant alternatives and control over which alternatives are favored. We introduce Route-Instruction Grounding and Steering (RIGS), a two-stage framework for instruction-conditioned retrosynthesis. Stage A trains a language projector, teaching it which alternatives an instruction favors or discourages. Stage B uses the projector learned in Stage A to steer a frozen generative model through lightweight residual adapters. We construct nested one-to-many training supports by pairing each product with increasing numbers of candidate precursor sets. Extensive experiments demonstrate that broader support helps the model generate a wider range of alternatives, and RIGS can learn to guide generation according to instructions. The relationship between coverage and control is consistent across model scales but non-monotone.
Key facts. No citing papers in the map yet (data through 14 Oct 2026). Builds on 23 of its 46 references that are in the map. First posted on arXiv 30 Sep 2026.
Builds on
23 of 46 references.
References · 23
- 2025Qwen3 Embedding: Advancing Text Embedding and Reranking Through Foundation Modelscited by 1,261
- 2017Learning to Plan Chemical Synthesescited by 179
- 2022Translation between Molecules and Natural Languagecited by 177
- 2022Multi-modal Molecule Structure-text Model for Text-based Retrieval and Editingcited by 166
- 2024Simple Guidance Mechanisms for Discrete Diffusion Modelscited by 155
- 2023Mol-Instructions: A Large-Scale Biomolecular Instruction Dataset for Large Language Modelscited by 133
- 2020Retro*: Learning Retrosynthetic Planning with Neural Guided A* Searchcited by 76
- 2023RetroBridge: Modeling Retrosynthesis with Markov Bridgescited by 36
- 2024Double-Ended Synthesis Planning with Goal-Constrained Bidirectional Searchcited by 24
- 2019Learning to Make Generalizable and Diverse Predictions for Retrosynthesiscited by 22
- 2025Chemical reasoning in LLMs unlocks strategy-aware synthesis planning and reaction mechanism elucidationcited by 17
- 2025AOT*: Efficient Synthesis Planning via LLM-Empowered AND-OR Tree Searchcited by 13
11 more
- 2025Synthelite: Chemist-aligned and feasibility-aware synthesis planning with LLMscited by 10
- 2024Equivariant Denoisers Cannot Copy Graphs: Align Your Graph Diffusion Modelscited by 8
- 2023RetroDiff: Retrosynthesis as Multi-stage Distribution Interpolationcited by 7
- 2024Preference Optimization for Molecule Synthesis with Conditional Residual Energy-based Modelscited by 6
- 2025RETRO SYNFLOW: Discrete Flow Matching for Accurate and Diverse Single-Step Retrosynthesiscited by 6
- 2024Retrosynthesis prediction enhanced by in-silico reaction data augmentationcited by 5
- 2026When Single Answer Is Not Enough: Rethinking Single-Step Retrosynthesis Benchmarks for LLMscited by 5
- 2024T-Rex: Text-assisted Retrosynthesis Predictioncited by 3
- 2026Order Matters in Retrosynthesis: Structure-aware Generation via Reaction-Center-Guided Discrete Flow Matchingcited by 3
- 2026From Feasible to Practical: Pareto-Optimal Synthesis Planningcited by 2
- 2026Project Ariadne: Prompt-Conditioned Route Generation for Synthesis Planningcited by 1
Built on by
Not cited yet.