In the absence of extensive collections of reaction rules against which our results could be compared, we opted to maximize accuracy and confidence in the rule sets at the expense of coverage. We ignore non-equivalent AAMs and ambiguous hydrogens, which account for approximately 14% of the database. The Coverage results in rule application within radii zero being limited to 93.5-94.5%, which is only slightly better than the 93.3% coverage achieved by RDChiral using SMARTS templates. However, this is achieved by a library of reaction patterns that, at present, contains only 311 entries, compared to more than 10000 SMARTS, indicating a drastic difference in generalization ability.