Chemically Meaningful Textualization Enables Explainable Validation of Metal-Organic Frameworks by Large Language Models

Large metal-organic framework (MOF) databases support simulation, screening, and machine learning through crystallographic information files (CIFs). Subtle chemical and structural errors in these inputs can compromise downstream results and hinder manual inspection. LLM advances in computational chemistry offer paths beyond predictive screening toward fine-grained diagnosis with evidence-grounded explanations. However, two challenges remain: (i) limited fine-grained attribution: MOF-specific validators and machine-learning models scale detection but provide fixed checks, readiness scores, or coarse labels rather than evidence-grounded explanations; and (ii) unreliable CIF reasoning: direct LLM auditing is costly and unreliable because chemical evidence is implicit across atom-site records and requires geometric, connectivity, occupancy, and charge calculations. Both stem from weak coupling between chemical evidence and language-model explanation. We introduce MOF-Sleuth, a reinforcement-guided CIF auditing agent with two modules: a deterministic Forensic Lab and a Sleuth reasoning engine. The Lab derives composition, geometry, connectivity, occupancy, coordination, and charge evidence, and Sleuth uses this evidence to produce an evidence-grounded explanation, error types, and a binary decision. Reward-guided reinforcement learning (RL) turns tool measurements into chemical explanation-level supervision, rewarding not only the final answer but also cited chemical evidence and evidence-supported diagnoses. We introduce Chemically Grounded Diagnosis (Chem-GD), a metric that assesses whether a correct diagnosis is explained by factual, relevant CIF-derived evidence. Across four benchmarks, MOF-Sleuth establishes state-of-the-art performance among LLM-based approaches and MOF-specific machine-learning methods, demonstrating gains in detection, attribution, and grounded explanation quality.

Inverse design of metal-organic frameworks (MOFs) requires searching a combinatorially vast space where property labels are expensive and most machine-learning models reveal little about why a structure succeeds. We introduce LLM4MOF, a closed-loop framework in which language-model agents reason about chemistry, build candidate MOFs, and test them in simulation, refining hypotheses over ten autonomous iterations. One agent proposes interpretable design hypotheses over metal nodes, linkers, pore geometry, and functional chemistry, and a second translates them into constraints that select candidate MOFs, each made of a metal node, organic linker, and matching topology. Each hypothesis is tested through four diagnostic beams that apply different subsets of its constraints, so comparing them shows whether geometry, chemistry, or metal choice drives performance. Even when blind to the global property landscape of databases, LLM4MOF concentrates its search on top-performing structures across six adsorption, separation, and electronic-structure tasks within 400 property evaluations. The same loop also generates new MOFs de novo and validates them in live simulation, where it adapts the geometry to each requested condition, outperforming random search and a genetic algorithm at roughly $1 per campaign. LLM4MOF shows that language-model agents can run interpretable, simulation-grounded inverse design without training a model per objective.

Scalable synthesis remains the gate between MOF discovery and industrial deployment, as scale-up know-how is fragmented across disparate reports. We introduce ScaleMOF, a literature-mined dataset and a positive-unlabeled learning strategy that fine-tunes large language models. Achieving 93.5% accuracy, this proof-of-concept serves as a literature-grounded ranking tool prioritizing plausible scale-up candidates.