[gilleain]

Ah, I do not think they are proposing a database of _predicted_ chemical reactions but of _known_ reactions.

I absolutely agree that enumerating reactions would suffer from combinatorial explosion (as opposed to chemical explosions, hoho). However there have been some efforts in what I know find is called 'computational retrosynthesis' (I think):

https://www.chemistryworld.com/features/computer-guided-retr...

Of course, any 'prediction' of a reaction relies on some model to give you an idea of how feasible it is to do in the lab, so I'm less worried about . There's the classic Derek Lowe post (that I've seen on here before, but still) about 'FOOF':

https://www.science.org/content/blog-post/things-i-won-t-wor...

[myst1]

Known reactions is also a very large space. Everyday dozens of papers get published enlisting many reactions on a good deal of different starting materials. Guess it depends on what you want out of it.