The reliability and functionality of Auto-VTNA were evaluated by the analysis of kinetic data previously reported in literature and comparing the results. The first selected example was the aza-Michael addition of piperidine 2 to dimethyl itaconate 1 (Scheme 1) reported by Clark et al. Interestingly, the order of the reaction was reported to change in different solvents: the reaction order in the piperidine was found to be 1 in ethanol, 2 in DMSO, 2 in THF, but 1.6 in IPA. Utilising the Auto-VTNA Calculator with default settings (5 th degree monotonic fitting with an RMSE overlay score), reaction orders in 1 and 2 were identified for the ethanol, IPA, THF, and DMSO datasets (Table ) within 3 minutes. Generally, the Auto-VTNA derived order values match the orders reported within 0.1 and gave equal or better concentration profile overlay than that obtained using reported orders (see ESI, Fig. ). An exception is the reaction in DMSO, for which the computed reaction orders of 0.77 and 1.86 deviated more significantly from the reported order values of 1 and 2. This is attributed to the sparsity of kinetic data obtained from the reaction DMSO (3 experiments with 4 time points each), which leads to a greater influence of random errors and inaccurate numerical integration. The results from each calculation can be represented as contour plots (Fig. ), showing well-defined overlay score minima around the best order values, in particular for the ethanol dataset (Fig. ).