Apr 27, 2026

Portable Raman Spectroscopy with AI detection for Dangerous Synthesis of Novel Pathogens

Mohamad, Merika, Grace, Dominic, Harry

Deadly pathogens synthesized in at homelab made with the help of AI have been a rising concern among national security. With this problem in mind, we aim to create a portable hand-held spectroscopy that is able to detect multiple types of peptides and, with the help of AI, detect whether the chemicals are potential precursors to make deadly diseases. We want to create a hardware + software system with embedded AI. We aim to promote our product to the government, FDA, places with a lot of traction, airport security etc. This would reduce chances of people smuggling in dangerous chemicals (created using open weight models) into and outside of the country/state for experiment.

Reviewer's Comments

Reviewer's Comments

Arrow
Arrow
Arrow

This is an interesting idea, but there's no apparent evidence for the

two most-important claims:

(a) That you can detect *peptides* instead of *organisms*.

[If the two inline-cited papers make this claim, you need to say

exactly *where*. A quick skim of both papers did not make this

obvious, and neither paper even mentions the word "peptide."]

(b) The *arduino* is cheap, but Raman spectrometers are not. They're

usually multiple tens of thousands of dollars. For the intended users

(LEO, interdiction, etc) this probably doesn't matter, but what you're

basically saying is that you can try to hook into existing devices

with a cheap add-on -- although existing devices already have built-in

databases with thousands of spectra in them, so *if* you can detect

peptide sequences directly, couldn't you just add this to the built-in

database in an existing unit?

Other issues:

(c) You make lots of inline references in the text which aren't in the

References section. Worse, you don't actually cite any of the items

in the References section in the body of the paper. So I have no

idea, for example, why you felt it necessary to cite Astral Codex

twice in a paper about Raman spectroscopy.

(d) What's with only first names on a paper? If submissions are

blinded, no names appear. Otherwise, it's typically assumed that

full names appear on a paper, because authorship reputation matters;

one needs to be able to find other work, retractions, citations, etc.

There's no working device and no AI here. The "results" in section 4 are dashboard screenshots and three pseudoruns with hand-typed sample outputs. Fig. 4 and 5 are SolidWorks renders of an empty case. The breadboard photo is an Arduino with a PN532 RFID/NFC module sitting on it; a Raman spectrometer is a laser, a spectrograph, and a CCD, none of which are present. I couldn't find a model, a training set, a spectral library, or any inference code in the repo links. The submission is a UI mockup, a 3D enclosure render, and a pitch.

The gap between "we have a UI and a CAD file" and "we have a portable detector" is several years of optics, embedded firmware, calibration, and ML work. The paper doesn't acknowledge that gap. Either build the smallest real thing (record one Raman spectrum on a benchtop instrument, classify it, show the result), or reframe honestly as a concept and UX study.

The UI work is fine for a hackathon weekend. Login, dashboard, analysis tabs, peptide database with 300 seeded rows. That's the actual deliverable.

Cite this work

@misc {

title={

(HckPrj) Portable Raman Spectroscopy with AI detection for Dangerous Synthesis of Novel Pathogens

},

author={

Mohamad, Merika, Grace, Dominic, Harry

},

date={

4/27/26

},

organization={Apart Research},

note={Research submission to the research sprint hosted by Apart.},

howpublished={https://apartresearch.com}

}

Recent Projects

Apr 27, 2026

OliGraph: graph-based screening of large oligopools

Existing synthesis screening tools cannot evaluate short oligonucleotide pools, whose overlapping fragments can be reassembled into regulated sequences via polymerase cycling assembly (PCA) yet fall below gene-length detection thresholds. We present OliGraph, an open-source tool that constructs a bi-directed overlap graph from an oligonucleotide pool and extracts contigs for downstream gene-length screening. An optional PCA mode retains only cross-strand overlaps consistent with PCA chemistry. We validated OliGraph in a blinded study across ten simulated pools (70–9,184 oligonucleotides, 30–300 bp) spanning four risk categories. BLAST screening of individual oligonucleotides failed to identify sequences of concern in most pools: three returned zero hits, and vector noise obscured true positives in the remainder. After OliGraph assembly, contig-level BLAST matched the longest assembled sequences (up to 1,905 bp) to sequences of concern at 97–100% identity. In one pool, assembly collapsed 1,634 individual BLAST results into 10 hits from a single contig, all assigned to the same source organism. PCA mode correctly distinguished assemblable from non-assemblable fragments within the same pool. Two pools with no assemblable structure yielded no contigs. OliGraph processed all pools in under 0.2 seconds, fast enough for real-time order screening and consistent with proposals to bring oligonucleotide orders within the scope of synthesis screening regulation.

Read More

Apr 27, 2026

BioRT-Bench: A Multi-Attack Red-Teaming Benchmark for Bio-Misuse Safeguards in Frontier LLMs

Frontier AI laboratories are expected to maintain safeguards against biological misuse, but whether deployed models actually refuse bio-misuse queries under adversarial pressure is largely unmeasured in the public literature. We introduce BioRT-Bench, a benchmark that runs four attack methods (direct request, PAIR, Crescendo, and base64 encoding) against four frontier models (Claude Sonnet 4.6, GPT-5.4, DeepSeek V4-flash, Kimi K2.5) across 40 prompts spanning five biosecurity-relevant categories. Responses are scored by a calibrated judge extending StrongREJECT with two bio-specific dimensions: specificity and actionability. We measure Attack Success Rate (ASR), where 0 means the model fully refused and 1 means it provided specific, actionable bio-misuse content. Our results reveal a sharp robustness divide: Chinese frontier models (DeepSeek, Kimi) have under 5% refusal rates even under direct request (ASR 0.88 and 0.79), while Western models (Claude, GPT) maintain substantially stronger safeguards (ASR 0.15 and 0.16). Crescendo is the most effective attack across all models, both in bypassing refusal and in eliciting actionable content. Claude Sonnet 4.6 is the most robust model tested, achieving 100% refusal against base64-encoded prompts.

Read More

Apr 27, 2026

PROTEUS (PROTein Evaluation for Unusual Sequences): Structure-Informed Safety Screening for de novo and Evasion-Prone Protein-Coding Sequences

AI protein design tools like RFdiffusion, ProteinMPNN, and Bindcraft make it trivial to produce low-homology sequences that fold into active, potentially hazardous architectures. However, sequence homology-based biosafety screening tools cannot detect proteins that pose functional risk through structurally novel mechanisms with no sequence precedent. We present a tiered computational pipeline that addresses this gap by combining MMseqs2 sequence alignment with structure-based comparison via FoldSeek and DALI against curated toxin databases totaling ~34,000 entries. AlphaFold2-predicted structures are screened for both global fold similarity (FoldSeek) and local active/allosteric site geometry (DALI), capturing convergent functional hazards that sequence screening misses. The pipeline was validated against a panel of toxins, benign proteins, structural mimics, and de novo-designed Munc13 binders, as well as modified ricin variants with residue substitutions. We additionally tested robustness to partial-synthesis evasion, where a bad actor submits multiple shorter coding sequences intended for downstream reassembly into a full toxin-coding gene. We found that while sequence-based screening did not identify any de novo ricin analogues with high certainty, the combined pipeline with FoldSeek and DALI identified all 24 tested de novo ricins as toxic.

Read More

Apr 27, 2026

OliGraph: graph-based screening of large oligopools

Existing synthesis screening tools cannot evaluate short oligonucleotide pools, whose overlapping fragments can be reassembled into regulated sequences via polymerase cycling assembly (PCA) yet fall below gene-length detection thresholds. We present OliGraph, an open-source tool that constructs a bi-directed overlap graph from an oligonucleotide pool and extracts contigs for downstream gene-length screening. An optional PCA mode retains only cross-strand overlaps consistent with PCA chemistry. We validated OliGraph in a blinded study across ten simulated pools (70–9,184 oligonucleotides, 30–300 bp) spanning four risk categories. BLAST screening of individual oligonucleotides failed to identify sequences of concern in most pools: three returned zero hits, and vector noise obscured true positives in the remainder. After OliGraph assembly, contig-level BLAST matched the longest assembled sequences (up to 1,905 bp) to sequences of concern at 97–100% identity. In one pool, assembly collapsed 1,634 individual BLAST results into 10 hits from a single contig, all assigned to the same source organism. PCA mode correctly distinguished assemblable from non-assemblable fragments within the same pool. Two pools with no assemblable structure yielded no contigs. OliGraph processed all pools in under 0.2 seconds, fast enough for real-time order screening and consistent with proposals to bring oligonucleotide orders within the scope of synthesis screening regulation.

Read More

Apr 27, 2026

BioRT-Bench: A Multi-Attack Red-Teaming Benchmark for Bio-Misuse Safeguards in Frontier LLMs

Frontier AI laboratories are expected to maintain safeguards against biological misuse, but whether deployed models actually refuse bio-misuse queries under adversarial pressure is largely unmeasured in the public literature. We introduce BioRT-Bench, a benchmark that runs four attack methods (direct request, PAIR, Crescendo, and base64 encoding) against four frontier models (Claude Sonnet 4.6, GPT-5.4, DeepSeek V4-flash, Kimi K2.5) across 40 prompts spanning five biosecurity-relevant categories. Responses are scored by a calibrated judge extending StrongREJECT with two bio-specific dimensions: specificity and actionability. We measure Attack Success Rate (ASR), where 0 means the model fully refused and 1 means it provided specific, actionable bio-misuse content. Our results reveal a sharp robustness divide: Chinese frontier models (DeepSeek, Kimi) have under 5% refusal rates even under direct request (ASR 0.88 and 0.79), while Western models (Claude, GPT) maintain substantially stronger safeguards (ASR 0.15 and 0.16). Crescendo is the most effective attack across all models, both in bypassing refusal and in eliciting actionable content. Claude Sonnet 4.6 is the most robust model tested, achieving 100% refusal against base64-encoded prompts.

Read More

This work was done during one weekend by research workshop participants and does not represent the work of Apart Research.
This work was done during one weekend by research workshop participants and does not represent the work of Apart Research.