Papers › How well can off-the-shelf LLMs elucidate molecular structures from mass spectra using...

How well can off-the-shelf LLMs elucidate molecular structures from mass spectra using chain-of-thought reasoning?

9 Jan 2026arXiv:2601.06289added by Syntology

Yufeng Wang, Lu Wei, Lin Liu, Hao Xu, Haibin Ling

Title, abstract, authors and date from arXiv's metadata (CC0); this paper is not in the Papers with Code archive (frozen 2025-07-28).

Mass spectrometry (MS) is a powerful analytical technique for identifying small molecules, yet determining complete molecular structures directly from tandem mass spectra (MS/MS) remains a long-standing challenge due to complex fragmentation patterns and the vast diversity of chemical space. Recent progress in large language models (LLMs) has shown promise for reasoning-intensive scientific tasks, but their capability for chemical interpretation is still unclear. In this work, we introduce a Chain-of-Thought (CoT) prompting framework and benchmark that evaluate how LLMs reason about mass spectral data to predict molecular structures. We formalize expert chemists' reasoning steps-such as double bond equivalent (DBE) analysis, neutral loss identification, and fragment assembly-into structured prompts and assess multiple state-of-the-art LLMs (Claude-3.5-Sonnet, GPT-4o-mini, and Llama-3 series) in a zero-shot setting using the MassSpecGym dataset. Our evaluation across metrics of SMILES validity, formula consistency, and structural similarity reveals that while LLMs can produce syntactically valid and partially plausible structures, they fail to achieve chemical accuracy or link reasoning to correct molecular predictions. These findings highlight both the interpretive potential and the current limitations of LLM-based reasoning for molecular elucidation, providing a foundation for future work that combines domain knowledge and reinforcement learning to achieve chemically grounded AI reasoning.

Code

Reachability, where shown, is from one Syntology probe window (2026-09-16 to 2026-09-18); repositories not probed show nothing. GitHub stars are not tracked.

Code Syntology ran Syntology

18 samples harvested; 0 ran; 0 honoured the contract we drafted; 18 have no recorded run. Read from Syntology's graph 2026-09-24; that is when this build read the record, not when the samples ran.

Licence: 18 of the 18 samples are pointer only, meaning Syntology does not serve that copy's text. This page shows no code text for any sample; each one links to its file in the repository.

Harvested from airscker/ms-cot-benchmark. “Ran” means the sample executed on a synthesized input. It does not mean the output is correct, and nothing here reproduces the paper's results. “Honoured” and “violated” refer to a contract Syntology drafted from the code itself; “our draft was wrong” and “fixture could not drive it” are failures of Syntology's instrument, not of the code.

Each sample ends with its code_sha256, Syntology's identity for that exact code. An agent fetches the stored sample with Syntology's MCP tool get_code(code_sha256="…") (how to connect); click an identity to copy that call.

Repository labels, per sample. official repository: The archive marks this repository official for the paper. named in the paper: The archive records that the paper mentions this repository; it is not marked official. community (archive-listed): In the archive's code links for this paper, not marked official and not recorded as mentioned in the paper. found in paper text by Syntology: Syntology found this repository in the paper's own text; whether it is the authors' implementation is not asserted. community: Not in the archive's code links for this paper; a community repository Syntology harvested. Samples from a repository marked official are listed first. Licence labels name the repository's licence as recorded at harvest. “Pointer only” means Syntology does not serve that copy's text, for one of four reasons: no licence file was found; the licence was not identified; the licence is recorded as permissive but that copy's record is not marked cleared; or the licence is outside the permissive list Syntology serves text under (MIT, Apache-2.0, BSD and similar). Some licences outside that list permit redistribution, such as WTFPL, and GPL-3.0 under its conditions; they are simply not on the list. Hover a licence label for the reason. File links open the file on GitHub at the default branch, which may have changed since the harvest.

Results from the paper

The Papers with Code archive ends with its 2025-07-28 snapshot. This paper's arXiv identifier, 2601.06289, was issued in January 2026, after that date, so the archive has no leaderboard rows for it.

Report a problem or propose a change · a person checks every report against the paper or source before anything changes; decisions are listed on /corrections