Hubbry Logo
Molecular graphMolecular graphMain
Open search
Molecular graph
Community hub
Molecular graph
logo
8 pages, 0 posts
0 subscribers
Be the first to start a discussion here.
Be the first to start a discussion here.
Molecular graph
Molecular graph
Molecular graph
View on Wikipedia
from Wikipedia
Molecular structure of caffeine. Methyl groups are implied, but not visualized.

In chemical graph theory and in mathematical chemistry, a molecular graph or chemical graph is a representation of the structural formula of a chemical compound in terms of graph theory. A chemical graph is a labeled graph whose vertices correspond to the atoms of the compound and edges correspond to chemical bonds. Its vertices are labeled with the kinds of the corresponding atoms and edges are labeled with the types of bonds.[1] For particular purposes any of the labelings may be ignored.

A hydrogen-depleted molecular graph or hydrogen-suppressed molecular graph is the molecular graph with hydrogen vertices deleted.

In some important cases (topological index calculation etc.) the following classical definition is sufficient: a molecular graph is a connected, undirected graph which admits a one-to-one correspondence with the structural formula of a chemical compound in which the vertices of the graph correspond to atoms of the molecule and edges of the graph correspond to chemical bonds between these atoms.[2] One variant is to represent materials as infinite Euclidean graphs, in particular, crystals as periodic graphs.[3]

History

[edit]

Arthur Cayley was probably the first to publish results that consider molecular graphs as early as in 1874, even before the introduction of the term "graph".[4] For the purposes of enumeration of isomers, Cayley considered "diagrams" made of points labelled by atoms and connected by links into an assemblage. He further introduced the terms plerogram and kenogram,[5] which are the molecular graph and the hydrogen-suppressed molecular graph respectively. If one continues to delete atoms connected by a single link further, one arrives at a mere kenogram, possibly empty.[6]

Danail Bonchev in his Chemical Graph Theory traces the origins of representation of chemical forces by diagrams which may be called "chemical graphs" to as early as the mid-18th century. In the early 18th century, Isaac Newton's notion of gravity had led to speculative ideas that atoms are held together by some kind of "gravitational force". In particular, since 1758 Scottish chemist William Cullen in his lectures used what he called "affinity diagrams" to represent forces supposedly existing between pairs of molecules in a chemical reaction. In a 1789 book by William Higgins similar diagrams were used to represent forces within molecules. These and some other contemporary diagrams had no relation to chemical bonds: the latter notion was introduced only in the following century.[7]

See also

[edit]

References

[edit]
Revisions and contributorsEdit on WikipediaRead on Wikipedia

Molecular graph

View on Grokipedia
from Grokipedia
A molecular graph, also referred to as a chemical graph, is an abstract representation of a molecule's in , where vertices correspond to atoms and edges represent covalent chemical bonds between them. This model captures the topological connectivity of the molecule, typically for constitutional (2D) structures, while abstracting away stereochemical or three-dimensional spatial details unless explicitly incorporated. Nodes in the graph may be labeled or weighted by atomic properties such as element type, and edges by bond orders (e.g., single, double, or aromatic). The foundations of molecular graphs and chemical graph theory emerged in the 19th century, building on early atomic models by in 1808 and graphical bond depictions by Archibald Couper in 1858. advanced the field in 1874 by enumerating tree-like structures for hydrocarbons, laying groundwork for counting, while James Sylvester coined the term "graph" in 1878 to describe molecular connectivity. Key formalization occurred in the 20th century with George Pólya's 1937 enumeration theorem, which used to systematically generate and count molecular isomers, such as those of alkanes or annulenes. The discipline gained momentum post-1970s through computational tools and the introduction of topological indices, enabling quantitative links between graph structure and molecular properties. Molecular graphs underpin numerous applications in cheminformatics and computational chemistry, including the enumeration and coding of constitutional, steric, and valence isomers for compound generation and validation. They facilitate database searching and similarity assessments via graph invariants, such as the Wiener index (sum of shortest path distances between all atom pairs, correlating with molecular branching and boiling points) and the Randić connectivity index (edge-weighted by inverse square root of vertex degrees, used in quantitative structure-activity relationships or QSAR). In organic synthesis, synthon and reaction graphs model multistep pathways, aiding computer-assisted planning tools like CONGEN or modern successors such as MAYGEN (2021). Additionally, molecular graphs support computer-assisted structure elucidation (CASE) in metabolomics, where fragmentation algorithms (e.g., MetFrag) reconstruct unknown compounds from mass spectrometry data, and enable machine learning models for drug discovery and property prediction.

Fundamentals

Definition

A molecular graph is a representation of a chemical compound's as an undirected graph, where vertices correspond to atoms and edges correspond to chemical bonds between them. This model abstracts the molecule's , focusing on connectivity rather than physical attributes. Unlike more complex graph models that may include directions or multiple edges, molecular graphs are typically simple and undirected, reflecting the bidirectional of covalent bonds without self-loops or parallel edges. They are unweighted in their basic form, though edge weights or labels can be added to denote bond orders (e.g., single, double, or triple bonds) when needed for specific analyses. The vertices may carry labels to indicate atomic types, such as carbon or , but the core structure emphasizes adjacency over quantitative bond strengths. Fundamental assumptions in this representation treat atoms as nodes devoid of inherent spatial , and bonds as mere connections that disregard stereochemical configurations like or cis-trans isomerism. This topological approach simplifies molecular analysis by prioritizing combinatorial properties over three-dimensional arrangements. For instance, the molecular graph of (CH₄) forms a graph, or K_{1,4}, with the central carbon vertex connected to four peripheral vertices, illustrating a basic tree-like structure without cycles.

Representation

Molecular graphs are visually represented by adapting Lewis structures into graph notation, where atoms serve as vertices and chemical bonds as edges, often omitting explicit atoms for carbon-centered skeletons to emphasize connectivity. This depiction simplifies complex molecular structures into skeletal formulas, facilitating qualitative analysis of in chemical . For small molecules, adjacency matrices provide a quantitative visual and computational representation, with rows and columns corresponding to atoms and entries indicating bond presence (typically 1 for single bonds between connected atoms, 0 otherwise). In computational encodings, SMILES (Simplified Molecular Input Line Entry System) strings linearize molecular graphs into text-based notations that capture atom types, connectivity, and , interpretable as graphs where sequential symbols denote vertices and implied or explicit symbols represent edges. Canonical labeling ensures unique representations by assigning consistent atom orders based on algorithms, enabling standardized comparisons and storage of molecular structures across databases. This process involves generating multiple possible labelings and selecting the lexicographically smallest one, often integrated into SMILES generation for reproducibility. Multiple bonds, such as double or triple bonds, are handled in molecular graphs through multigraphs, where parallel edges between vertices represent bond multiplicity, or via edge labels assigning weights (e.g., 2 for double bonds). This extension from simple graphs preserves valence information essential for reactivity predictions. For example, is represented as a C6C_6 with six carbon vertices forming a ring and alternating double bonds encoded as edge weights of 1 and 2, or in SMILES as c1ccccc1 where lowercase 'c' implies and single/double bonds are delocalized.

Structural Properties

Valence and Degree

In chemical graph theory, molecular graphs are typically represented as hydrogen-depleted structures, where vertices correspond to non-hydrogen atoms and edges represent covalent bonds between them, excluding bonds to atoms. The degree of a vertex in such a graph is defined as the number of edges incident to it, which quantifies the bonds formed by the atom with other non-hydrogen atoms. This degree directly relates to the chemical valence of the atom but accounts only for explicit connections in the graph, necessitating adjustments for implicit hydrogens to fully satisfy valence rules. The valence of an atom denotes its capacity to form bonds, determined by its in organic molecules. For instance, carbon atoms have a standard valence of 4, oxygen atoms 2, and atoms 3, reflecting their typical patterns in neutral organic compounds. In the hydrogen-depleted molecular graph, the vertex degree for a like oxygen is at most 2 (e.g., in ethers or alcohols), while for nitrogen it is at most 3 (e.g., in amines), ensuring compatibility with these valence constraints. Molecular graphs may use edge labels or weights to represent bond orders (single, double, triple, or aromatic). Implicit hydrogens are calculated for each vertex as the difference between the atom's standard valence and the sum of the bond orders of its connections to other non- atoms, providing a complete bonding profile without explicitly including hydrogen vertices. This approach simplifies graph-based computations while preserving chemical accuracy. A representative example is the molecular graph of (C₂H₅OH), where the vertices are two carbon atoms (C1 for the , C2 for the ) and one oxygen atom, with edges connecting C1 to C2 and C2 to O. The degree of C1 is 1 (bonded only to C2), so it requires 3 implicit s to reach a valence of 4; C2 has degree 2 (bonded to C1 and O), requiring 2 implicit s; and O has degree 1 (bonded to C2), requiring 1 implicit to satisfy its valence of 2. This structure yields the full C₂H₆O, illustrating how graph degrees and valence rules reconstruct the molecule's hydrogen content.

Connectivity and Cycles

In molecular graphs, connectivity refers to the existence of paths between vertices representing atoms, where a path is a of distinct edges (bonds) connecting two vertices without repetition. A molecular graph is connected if there is at least one path between every pair of vertices, which corresponds to a single, intact where all atoms are linked through covalent bonds. In contrast, disconnected molecular graphs represent separate molecular components, such as in mixtures or dissociated species, but single molecules are typically modeled as connected graphs to reflect their structural unity. Cycles in molecular graphs capture ring structures, which are closed paths where the starting and ending vertices coincide, forming loops of atoms and bonds essential for molecular stability and reactivity. For instance, is represented as a simple 6-cycle (C6) in its molecular graph, with six carbon vertices each connected to two neighbors, embodying the saturated ring's . These cycles distinguish cyclic compounds from acyclic ones, influencing properties like planarity and strain. Bridge edges, or cut edges, are bonds whose removal increases the number of connected components in the molecular graph, indicating critical linkages that, if broken, would fragment the molecule into separate parts. Similarly, articulation points (cut vertices) are atoms whose removal, along with their incident edges, disconnects the graph, highlighting pivotal sites for structural integrity, such as branch points in complex hydrocarbons. In naphthalene, a fused cycle graph consists of two 6-cycles sharing two adjacent vertices and the edge between them, forming a bicyclic structure without bridge edges or articulation points, ensuring high connectivity. Vertex degrees, as endpoints in paths, further contextualize these features by quantifying local bonding at cycle junctions.

Topological Invariants

Graph Invariants

Graph invariants, also known as topological indices in chemical , are numerical quantities derived from the of a molecular graph that remain unchanged under graph isomorphisms and provide summaries of molecular . These invariants capture essential features such as , connectivity, and branching without reference to atomic coordinates or three-dimensional , making them valuable for comparative analysis in chemistry. In molecular graphs, where vertices represent atoms and edges represent bonds, invariants are typically computed on hydrogen-suppressed graphs to focus on the carbon skeleton or full atomic structure as needed. The most fundamental graph invariants are the number of vertices, edges, and connected components. The number of vertices, denoted |V(G)|, equals the number of in the , while the number of edges |E(G)| corresponds to the number of bonds; for example, in a saturated graph, |E(G)| = (|V(G)| - 1) due to the tree-like structure. The number of connected components indicates whether the molecular graph represents a single or multiple entities, such as in salts or reaction mixtures, with most neutral organic molecules having one component. Distance-based invariants quantify the overall spread or compactness of the molecular structure using shortest path distances between atoms. The , introduced by Harry Wiener in 1947, is defined as the sum of the shortest path distances over all unordered pairs of vertices: W(G)=∑1≤i<j≤nd(i,j)W(G) = \sum_{1 \leq i < j \leq n} d(i,j) where d(i,j)d(i,j) is the length of the shortest path between vertices ii and jj, and n=∣V(G)∣n = |V(G)|. This index measures the "size" of the molecule in topological terms and correlates with properties like boiling points in alkanes, as Wiener originally demonstrated. Branching and shape invariants account for the degree distribution and skeletal complexity of molecules. The Randić index, proposed by Milan Randić in 1975, is a connectivity index that weights edges by the inverse square root of the product of the degrees of their incident vertices: χ(G)=∑(i,j)∈E(G)(didj)−1/2\chi(G) = \sum_{(i,j) \in E(G)} (d_i d_j)^{-1/2} where did_i and djd_j are the degrees (valences) of vertices ii and jj. This invariant penalizes highly branched structures with low-degree vertices and has been widely used to distinguish isomers with similar vertex counts but different topologies. For illustration, consider n- (C5_5H12_{12}), whose molecular graph is a path of five vertices. The pairwise distances are: four at distance 1, three at 2, two at 3, and one at 4, yielding W(G)=1⋅4+2⋅3+3⋅2+4⋅1=4+6+6+4=20W(G) = 1 \cdot 4 + 2 \cdot 3 + 3 \cdot 2 + 4 \cdot 1 = 4 + 6 + 6 + 4 = 20. This value is higher than for branched pentane isomers like (W=16), highlighting how linear chains extend topological distances.

Molecular Descriptors

Molecular descriptors in the context of molecular graphs are numerical invariants derived from graph structures to predict physicochemical properties such as reactivity, stability, and energy levels of molecules. These descriptors extend basic graph invariants by incorporating chemical-specific features like valence and bonding patterns, enabling quantitative structure-property relationships (QSPR) in . Unlike purely topological measures, they often integrate spectral or degree-based information to model molecular behavior more accurately. Topological indices for reactivity, such as the Hosoya index, quantify the number of independent edge matchings in a molecular graph, providing insights into molecular branching and saturation effects on reactivity. Introduced by Haruo Hosoya, the index Z(G) for a graph G is defined as the total number of matchings, given by the evaluation of the matching polynomial at x=1, or equivalently Z(G) = \sum_{k=0}^{\lfloor n/2 \rfloor} m_k(G), where m_k(G) is the number of k-edge matchings and n is the number of vertices. For trees, it satisfies the Z(G) = Z(G - v) + Z(G - u - v), where v is a pendant vertex adjacent to u. This index correlates with properties like the heat of formation and reactivity in saturated hydrocarbons, where higher Z values indicate greater stability due to more dispersed matchings. Spectral descriptors leverage the eigenvalues of the A of a molecular graph to capture vibrational and electronic properties, approximating molecular orbitals in models. The is defined as P(G, \lambda) = \det(\lambda I - A), whose roots are the eigenvalues \lambda_1 \geq \lambda_2 \geq \cdots \geq \lambda_n, providing a that encodes symmetry and connectivity. These eigenvalues relate to the Hückel molecular orbital energies in conjugated systems, where the largest eigenvalue \lambda_1 approximates the highest occupied energy, influencing reactivity. Spectral moments, such as \sum \lambda_i^k, serve as descriptors for QSAR, correlating with properties like in organic molecules. Valence-specific descriptors, like the Zagreb indices, emphasize vertex degrees to model bonding strength and molecular compactness, particularly in hydrocarbons where degree represents valence. The first Zagreb index is M_1(G) = \sum_{i=1}^n d_i^2, summing the squares of degrees d_i over all vertices, while the second is M_2(G) = \sum_{uv \in E(G)} d_u d_v, summing products of degrees over edges. Developed by Ivan Gutman and Nenad Trinajstić, these indices approximate total π-electron energy in alternant hydrocarbons, with M_1 capturing overall branching and M_2 edge-wise interactions.

Applications

Chemical Modeling

Molecular graphs serve as abstract representations of chemical structures, enabling simulations and analyses that abstract away from explicit atomic coordinates while preserving connectivity information. In chemical modeling, these graphs facilitate the exploration of molecular behaviors through combinatorial and algorithmic approaches, allowing chemists to predict structural motifs, spatial arrangements, and reactivity patterns without relying on computationally intensive geometric optimizations. This graph-centric paradigm is particularly valuable for and hypothesis generation in and . Graph-based structure search employs subgraph isomorphism algorithms to identify specific functional groups within larger molecular graphs, treating the target motif—such as a hydroxyl or carbonyl—as a query subgraph to match against the host . This method efficiently detects embedded patterns by mapping vertices and edges while respecting labels for atom types and bond orders, reducing the complexity of manual inspection in complex scaffolds. For instance, Ullmann's algorithm and its variants have been benchmarked for substructure matching in molecular databases, demonstrating high accuracy for common functional groups like aromatic rings. Topological indices derived from these graphs can further quantify similarity, aiding in prioritization of matches. In conformational analysis, molecular graphs act as topological scaffolds that guide the embedding of atoms into , decoupling connectivity from initial geometric constraints to explore viable low-energy conformers. By representing the molecule's bonding network, graphs enable systematic of possible spatial arrangements, such as ring puckering or chain folding, through distance geometry or generative models that assign coordinates while minimizing steric clashes. Conditional generative neural networks, for example, use graph inputs to produce diverse 3D conformations tailored to specified properties like or flexibility, bypassing exhaustive sampling. This approach is essential for modeling flexible biomolecules where multiple conformations influence binding affinity. Reaction mapping leverages graph editing operations to simulate chemical transformations, where bond breaking and forming are depicted as edge deletions, additions, or label changes, thereby tracing reaction pathways from reactants to products. Algorithms based on compute minimal sequences of such operations, capturing the stoichiometry and connectivity shifts in . This framework allows for the prediction of feasible routes by minimizing edit costs, as demonstrated in solid-state reaction networks.

Computational Chemistry

In , molecular graphs serve as foundational structures for various algorithms in cheminformatics, enabling efficient analysis of molecular connectivity and spatial relationships. Shortest path algorithms, such as Floyd-Warshall or Dijkstra's, are commonly employed to compute distance metrics between atoms, which underpin topological descriptors like the that quantify overall molecular branching and compactness. These metrics facilitate tasks such as similarity searching and identification by measuring the minimum number of bonds between atoms. For tree-like structures such as dendrimers, which are modeled as acyclic graphs with a central core and branching layers, tree traversal algorithms like are utilized to enumerate branches, calculate generation-specific distances, and derive structural invariants for property prediction. Quantitative structure-activity relationship (QSAR) and quantitative structure-property relationship (QSPR) models leverage molecular graph descriptors to perform regression analyses for predicting physicochemical properties, such as normal points, which correlate with intermolecular forces and molecular size. In these models, graph-based features like eccentricity or path counts are fed into linear or nonlinear regressors to estimate points for diverse organic compounds. Topological indices have been shown to provide good predictive accuracy for points of alkanes and other compounds. Key software tools for molecular graph manipulation include RDKit and OpenBabel, both open-source cheminformatics libraries that represent molecules as editable graphs for tasks like substructure matching and descriptor computation. RDKit, implemented in C++ with Python bindings, supports graph-based operations such as generation and bond perception, while OpenBabel excels in format interconversion and graph canonicalization for large datasets. These tools integrate seamlessly with (MD) simulations; for example, RDKit can generate 3D conformations and force field parameters compatible with OpenMM, enabling hybrid workflows where graph-derived topologies initialize MD trajectories for energy minimization and property sampling. A prominent example of advanced graph-based prediction involves graph neural networks (GNNs), which process molecular adjacency matrices to forecast properties like energy levels or reactivity. In the seminal work on neural message passing, GNNs propagate features along graph edges to learn representations that outperform traditional descriptors in quantum chemistry tasks, such as predicting dipole moments with mean absolute errors around 0.2 Debye for small molecules. This approach treats the adjacency matrix as input to iterative message updates, capturing long-range interactions without explicit coordinate geometry. Recent advances as of 2025 have further integrated graph representations with generative models for de novo molecule design in drug discovery.

Historical Development

Origins in Graph Theory

The origins of molecular graph theory lie in the foundational developments of , which provided the mathematical framework for modeling connectivity and structure in abstract networks. The field of itself emerged from Leonhard Euler's seminal 1736 solution to the Seven Bridges of problem, where he demonstrated that no continuous path could traverse all seven bridges exactly once due to the odd degrees of vertices in the resulting . This work introduced key concepts of connectivity and Eulerian paths, establishing as a tool for analyzing path traversability in networks, which later proved essential for representing molecular bonds as edges between atomic vertices. Euler's approach abstracted geographical features into vertices and edges, laying the groundwork for applying similar representations to discrete structures like molecules. A significant advancement came in 1875 with Arthur Cayley's enumeration of tree structures, directly linking graph theory to chemical isomer counting. Cayley formalized the enumeration of unlabeled trees with up to four branches per vertex, corresponding to the carbon atoms in alkane molecules (CnH2n+2), where trees represent acyclic hydrocarbon skeletons without cycles. His method used generating functions to count distinct isomers, such as the 18 possible structures for , by considering rooted and unrooted trees while accounting for valence constraints. This application marked one of the earliest uses of graph-theoretic enumeration in chemistry, treating molecular formulas as constraints on tree valency. Building on such enumerative techniques, developed his enumeration theorem in 1937, incorporating to count distinct graphs under symmetry operations. Pólya's theorem employs the of a acting on graph colorings or labelings to generate the number of non-isomorphic structures, applicable to counting molecular graphs invariant under rotations or reflections. For instance, it efficiently enumerates derivatives by averaging fixed points over the symmetries, avoiding redundant listings of equivalent configurations. This group-theoretic approach revolutionized combinatorial graph counting, providing a systematic way to handle symmetries inherent in molecular representations. Initial explicit applications of these graph-theoretic ideas to chemical structures appeared in Frank Harary and Robert Z. Norman's 1953 work on Husimi trees, which extended tree dissimilarity characteristics to clustered graphs modeling molecular assemblies. Husimi trees, defined as graphs where every edge lies on exactly one cycle, captured branching patterns in polyatomic molecules, with dissimilarity measures quantifying structural differences between isomers. Their analysis introduced graphical invariants like the dissimilarity characteristic polynomial to distinguish non-isomorphic chemical graphs, bridging pure graph enumeration with practical molecular identification. This paper formalized the use of graph theory for chemical modeling, influencing subsequent developments in topological descriptors.

Evolution in Chemistry

The application of to molecular structures gained traction in chemistry during the 1960s, particularly through the work of Alexandru T. Balaban, who pioneered the use of graphs to enumerate isomers of cage hydrocarbons and annulenes. Balaban's 1966 publication introduced reaction graphs to model elementary steps in , marking an early chemical adaptation of graph-theoretic tools for beyond . This laid groundwork for topological indices tailored to chemical compounds, with Balaban later developing the Balaban index in 1982 specifically for distinguishing cage-like structures in quantitative structure-activity relationship (QSAR) studies. In the and , chemists revived and expanded early topological invariants like the —originally proposed in 1947 for predicting properties—for QSAR modeling, correlating molecular branching with biological activities such as potency. This revival emphasized distance-based descriptors to quantify structural complexity, enabling predictive regressions for physicochemical properties. A seminal contribution was Milan Randić's 1975 connectivity index, which weighted bonds by vertex degrees to better capture branching effects, achieving superior correlations in QSAR for diverse organic compounds compared to unweighted paths. The index's influence persisted, underpinning thousands of subsequent QSAR applications by the . A key milestone in the late 1980s was the development of the Simplified Molecular Input Line Entry System (SMILES) by David Weininger in 1988, a string-based notation for serializing molecular graphs that facilitated machine-readable representation of chemical structures. SMILES encoded atoms as symbols and bonds as connections, enabling efficient storage and querying in computational workflows. From the 1990s onward, molecular graphs integrated with bioinformatics, modeling protein interaction networks and metabolic pathways as graphs to analyze genomic data from projects like the . This era saw graph databases emerge for large-scale chemical screening, allowing substructure searches across millions of compounds to identify drug candidates, with systems like those based on later optimizing pipelines.

References

  1. https://taylorandfrancis.com/knowledge/Engineering_and_technology/Chemical_engineering/Molecular_graph/
  2. https://people.unipmn.it/fragnelli/dispense/Chimica/Balaban.pdf
  3. https://docs.chemaxon.com/display/docs/representation_molecule-graph.md
  4. https://www.britannica.com/biography/John-Dalton/Atomic-theory
  5. https://www.preprints.org/manuscript/202111.0546/v1/download
  6. https://www.daylight.com/meetings/emug98/cayley.html
  7. https://pubs.acs.org/doi/10.1021/ci00047a033
  8. https://www.researchgate.net/profile/Danail-Bonchev/publication/258021291_Chemical_Graph_Theory/links/0deec52699c53ad86e000000/Chemical-Graph-Theory.pdf
  9. https://www.nature.com/articles/s41598-025-14175-w
  10. https://www.jmchemsci.com/article_135204.html
  11. https://iopscience.iop.org/article/10.1088/1742-6596/3122/1/012009
  12. https://jcheminf.biomedcentral.com/articles/10.1186/s13321-020-00460-5
  13. https://pubs.acs.org/doi/10.1021/ci00057a005
  14. https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC3495655/
  15. https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/016612809380012O
  16. https://www.researchgate.net/publication/262388778_The_depleted_hydrogen_atoms_in_chemical_graph_theory
  17. https://pubs.acs.org/doi/10.1021/ci980039b
  18. https://www.chemistrysteps.com/valency-formal-charges-organic-chemistry/
  19. https://docs.chemaxon.com/display/docs/representation_implicit-explicit-and-query-hydrogens.md
  20. https://webbook.nist.gov/cgi/cbook.cgi?ID=C64175
  21. https://www.taylorfrancis.com/books/mono/10.1201/9781315139111/chemical-graph-theory-nenad-trinajstic
  22. https://jcheminf.biomedcentral.com/articles/10.1186/s13321-024-00933-x
  23. https://match.pmf.kg.ac.rs/electronic_versions/Match60/n1/match60n1_3-14.pdf
  24. https://pubs.acs.org/doi/10.1021/ci980032u
  25. https://www.nature.com/articles/s41598-025-18870-6
  26. https://jcheminf.biomedcentral.com/articles/10.1186/1758-2946-4-13
  27. https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0959440X23000404
  28. https://www.nature.com/articles/s41467-022-28526-y
  29. https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC5887236/
  30. https://jcheminf.biomedcentral.com/articles/10.1186/s13321-024-00883-4
  31. https://pubs.acs.org/doi/10.1021/acs.jcim.8b00820
  32. https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1155/2018/2684984
  33. https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC7942711/
  34. https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC6147301/
  35. https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S000925092500051X
  36. https://academic.oup.com/etc/article-pdf/22/8/1696/59667917/5620220805.pdf
  37. https://parssilico.com/blogs/112-exploring-top-open-source-toolkits-for-cheminformatics-rdkit-open-babel-and-cdk
  38. https://macinchem.org/2023/02/17/open-source-cheminformatics-toolkits/
  39. https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC10577930/
  40. https://cresset-group.com/about/news/boosting-rdkit-molecular-simulations-through-openm/
  41. https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2665963824000447
  42. https://arxiv.org/abs/1704.01212
  43. https://www.nature.com/articles/s44386-025-00017-2
  44. https://www.cantab.net/users/michael.behrend/repubs/maze_maths/pages/euler_en.html
  45. https://oeis.org/A000675
  46. https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/BF02546665
  47. https://www.jstor.org/stable/1969824
  48. https://marine.tamu.edu/academics/marine-coastal-environmental-science/_files/_documents/cv/alexandru-balaban.pdf
  49. https://match.pmf.kg.ac.rs/electronic_versions/Match29/match29_3-17.pdf
  50. https://imada.sdu.dk/~daniel/DM840-2020/Material/Slides/week48-mol-des.partially-mandatory.pdf
  51. https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S1093326301000985
  52. https://www.daylight.com/dayhtml/doc/theory/theory.smiles.html
  53. https://bmcbioinformatics.biomedcentral.com/articles/10.1186/1471-2105-8-S6-S8
  54. https://pubs.acs.org/doi/10.1021/acs.jmedchem.7b00809
Add your contribution
Related Hubs
User Avatar
No comments yet.