Machine-learned models can now propose three-dimensional transition-state (TS) geometries in seconds, but a candidate geometry is not a validated TS. The gap between a plausible structure and a mechanistically meaningful barrier—one imaginary frequency, the intended atom pair, the correct connectivity, and a consistent electronic state—remains the bottleneck in AI-assisted computational chemistry. We present a validation-first protocol that separates candidate generation from physical validation. The protocol combines (i) a chemical preflight that fixes reactive pairs, spin surfaces, connectivity, and conformers; (ii) a per-point independent scan that localizes the barrier without fragile collective scans; (iii) a constrained reference calculation that produces the Hessian; (iv) an OptTS stage that reuses that Hessian; and (v) a validation stage based on imaginary-mode localization, key bond lengths, IRC endpoints, spin diagnostics, and energy-convention checks. The protocol is implemented as a portable, open-source skill package for local ORCA/xtb and Gaussian/Slurm execution. Case studies from Ni/Fe catalysis illustrate the failure modes the protocol is designed to catch: a generative model produced candidates with 3.6–4.4 Å heavy-atom RMSD for an 84-atom broken-symmetry organometallic system, a collective scan failed three times where a per-point strategy completed 16/16 points, and a single-conformer R/S comparison would have misread a conformerdominated difference. The reported gains of multi-sampling and conformer enumeration are taken from the published benchmark, not measured here. We argue that the near-term role of AI is not to replace electronic-structure judgment but to shrink the search space before it and to make the validation layer reproducible.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Haofan Li (2026) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: