In this case, no side-reactions of the network are deemed important and we score the catalyst solely based on the reactant to TS3 GFN2-xTB electronic energy barrier as done in the original study . The five GA searches done by Seumer et al. are now repeated with the same starting populations (100 generations, a population size of 100 and a mutation rate of 50%, details can be found in 5) . The only difference is, that while the original study scored the catalysts based on a GFN2-xTB TS template from a known catalyst (DABCO) we score the catalysts based on a GFN2-xTB TS template from the simple and generic catalyst template, TMA. As the GA optimization has several stochastic elements, we do not expect to find the exact same final populations. However, molecules containing an azetidine ring are still dominating the final populations and in fact 20 of the catalysts are present in both this and the original study (Figure ). We calculate the TS and barrier for the rate-determining step (TS3) for three of them (m5, m6 and m10) at the DFT level and find an activation energy ≈2 kcal/mol lower than DABCO (≈20 kcal/mol vs.