ChemHGNN: A Hierarchical Hypergraph Neural Network for Reaction Virtual Screening and Discovery
Xiaobao Huang, Yihong Ma, Anjali Gurajapu, Jules Schleinitz, Zhichun Guo, Sarah E. Reisman, Nitesh V. Chawla

TL;DR
ChemHGNN introduces a hierarchical hypergraph neural network that effectively models multi-reactant reactions, significantly improving reaction virtual screening and discovery by capturing high-order relationships and addressing key challenges.
Contribution
This work presents ChemHGNN, a novel hypergraph neural network framework that naturally models multi-reactant reactions and incorporates hierarchical features, outperforming traditional GNNs in reaction prediction tasks.
Findings
ChemHGNN outperforms GNN and HGNN baselines on the USPTO dataset.
The model maintains interpretability and chemical plausibility.
ChemHGNN is effective in large-scale reaction screening.
Abstract
Reaction virtual screening and discovery are fundamental challenges in chemistry and materials science, where traditional graph neural networks (GNNs) struggle to model multi-reactant interactions. In this work, we propose ChemHGNN, a hypergraph neural network (HGNN) framework that effectively captures high-order relationships in reaction networks. Unlike GNNs, which require constructing complete graphs for multi-reactant reactions, ChemHGNN naturally models multi-reactant reactions through hyperedges, enabling more expressive reaction representations. To address key challenges, such as combinatorial explosion, model collapse, and chemically invalid negative samples, we introduce a reaction center-aware negative sampling strategy (RCNS) and a hierarchical embedding approach combining molecule, reaction and hypergraph level features. Experiments on the USPTO dataset demonstrate that…
Peer Reviews
Decision·Submitted to ICLR 2026
The motivation for higher-order modeling with hypergraphs is clear, though it is not novel given a substantial literature. The pipeline is tidy: a reaction-center-pretrained Weisfeiler–Lehman Network (WLN) produces molecule embeddings that feed the hypergraph model. On USPTO, the method shows gains across multiple negative sampling schemes (NS). Ablations indicate that removing the WLN features, using something other than simple sum aggregation, or dropping the mean squared error regularizer (MS
The model does not natively propose or score arbitrary reactant sets; it only classifies provided hyperedges. Candidate sets come from dataset positives and NS-generated negatives; the only attempt to explore new combinations is SA, which is is an untrained block that is "external" to the proposed neural net. This weakens the “discovery” narrative and entangles performance with SA design choices. External validity is thin: all results are USPTO-based; no independent datasets or real screening ca
1. **Well-motivated hierarchical design.** Using a pre-trained WLN to extract molecule/bond features and feeding them into a hypergraph-level model is a natural way to combine local (bond-level) and global (reaction-level) context. 2. **Insightful empirical analysis.** Experiments diagnose the “model collapse” failure mode of some GNNs and demonstrate ChemHGNN’s robustness. 3. **Generalization to unseen templates.** Results suggest the model captures transferable chemical patterns that apply to
1. **Questionable novelty / outdated components.** The core architecture mainly combines existing components (WLN + a basic HGNN). The paper does not convincingly justify why these choices were preferred over more expressive, modern GNN/HGNN designs. The technical contribution risks reading as an engineering assembly rather than a novel network design. 2. **Dataset limitations.** Evaluation is confined to subsets of the USPTO dataset. Additional reaction corpora are needed to substantiate claims
1、Novel task formulation. The paper focuses on reaction feasibility prediction (“can a given reactant set react?”), which differs from traditional product-prediction tasks and is conceptually interesting. 2、Clear and modular architecture. The hierarchical design is logically consistent and well-motivated.
1. Several figures in the main text and appendix suffer from extremely low resolution, making them difficult to read (e.g., Figs. 4–7). In addition, there are clear labeling and content errors( for instance, in Fig. 7, the title of the third sub-figure appears to be incorrect, and the accompanying color bar seems unrelated to the plotted image). These presentation issues significantly hinder readability. 2. The experimental comparison is limited to general-purpose graph models such as GCN,, an
Videos
No videos yet. Explain this paper in a talk, walkthrough, or lecture? Add one.
Taxonomy
TopicsComputational Drug Discovery Methods
