Skip to main content

Spectral Full House

So, all of the isomers of C4H11O are in NMRShiftDB and here are all the experimental and predicted carbon spectra:

It's not obvious from this picture, but not all of the predicted spectra are unique matches for their experimental partners. In other words, you could not pick out the right molecule by comparing the predicted and experimental spectra.

The situation is more difficult still for larger isomer spaces, where the predicted spectra may be exactly the same for sub-sets of the isomers. There are still many with unique predictions, but the rest follow a sort of power-law distribution of spectral-equivalent sets.

EDIT: As per a suggestion by egon, here is a table of top hits (a yellow square indicates the top match):

Comments

Nice example.

1. Now, the next step is to express the proper similarity of the predicted versus experimental spectrum. A 7x7 matrix. If you color the cells of that matrix by similarity, you should immediately see a trace on on the diagonal (if matches are properly found). You'll notice that not every similarity measure is equally sensitive for this data. (Check bc_seneca for my suggested measure :)

2. I also would like to see if it works out nicely for the oxygens... since these are much more alike, I expect two group: hydroxyl and ether, but am interested in seeing the results for that too... just out of curiosity...
cic said…
Very nice indeed.
It will be interesting to see how this does statistically develop over a larger number of test sets. Since we have already demonstrated that a-pinene can be found in a C10H16 chemical space, it is not safe to assume that the number of degenerate cases grows in some clear way with the number of atoms in the molecular formular.
CIC, what information was used for that, only 1D 13C data, and what 13NMR prediction software?

Christoph's SENECA code can easily find a-pinene too, particularly when hydrogen count info for the carbons is included (DEPT experiment).

CIC, I noted that your blog is empty? Do you have yet to start blogging? And, at which university is your fachgruppe? CIC, as in the former Gasteiger group?
Gilleain, the matrix is interesting. You mentioned as there are a few clearly off-diagonal hits. Which similarity measure did you use there? Can you please try the WCC too? Source code can be found in the Bioclipse1 repository.
gilleain said…
Hei Egon,

I used the simplest possible similarity measure, which is the sum of the differences between pairs of equivalent peaks, where equivalence is based on respective order in the peak lists.

I don't know what the WCC code is weighting by, I should look at it again (and get Mark to translate the code comments, some of which are in Dutch :)

Popular posts from this blog

How many isomers of C4H11N are there?

One of the most popular queries that lands people at this blog is about the isomers of C4H11N - which I suspect may be some kind of organic chemistry question on student homework. In any case, this post will describe how to find all members of a small space like this by hand rather than using software.

Firstly, lets connect all the hydrogens to the heavy atoms (C and N, in this case). For example:


Now eleven hydrogens can be distributed among these five heavy atoms in various ways. In fact this is the problem of partitioning a number into a list of other numbers which I've talked about before. These partitions and (possible) fragment lists are shown here:


One thing to notice is that all partitions have to have 5 parts - even if one of those parts is 0. That's not strictly a partition anymore, but never mind. The other important point is that some of the partitions lead to multiple fragment lists - [3, 3, 2, 2, 1] could have a CH+NH2 or an NH+CH2.

The final step is to connect u…

Havel-Hakimi Algorithm for Generating Graphs from Degree Sequences

A degree sequence is an ordered list of degrees for the vertices of a graph. For example, here are some graphs and their degree sequences:



Clearly, each graph has only one degree sequence, but the reverse is not true - one degree sequence can correspond to many graphs. Finally, an ordered sequence of numbers (d1 >= d2 >= ... >= dn > 0) may not be the degree sequence of a graph - in other words, it is not graphical.

The Havel-Hakimi (HH) theorem gives us a way to test a degree sequence to see if it is graphical or not. As a side-effect, a graph is produced that realises the sequence. Note that it only produces one graph, not all of them. It proceeds by attaching the first vertex of highest degree to the next set of high-degree vertices. If there are none left to attach to, it has either used up all the sequence to produce a graph, or the sequence was not graphical.



The image above shows the HH algorithm at work on the sequence [3, 3, 2, 2, 1, 1]. Unfortunately, this produce…

Generating Trees

Tree generation is a well known (and solved!) problem in computer science. On the other hand, it's pretty important for various problems - in my case, making tree-like fusanes. I'll describe here the slightly tortuous route I took to make trees.

Firstly, there is a famous theorem due to Cayley that the number of (labelled) trees on n vertices is nn - 2 which can be proved by using Prüfer sequences. That's all very well, you might well say - but what does all this mean?

Well, it's not all that important, since there is a fundamental problem with this approach : the difference between a labelled tree and an unlabelled tree. There are many more labeled trees than unlabeled :


There is only one unlabeled tree on 3 vertices, but 3 labeled ones
this is easy to check using the two OEIS sequences for this : A000272 (labeled) and A000055 (unlabeled). For n ranging from 3 to 8 we have [3, 16, 125, 1296, 16807, 262144] labeled trees and [1, 2, 3, 6, 11, 23] unlabeled ones. Only 23 …