Regularized machine learning on molecular graph model explains systematic error in DFT enthalpies
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
A major goal of materials research is the discovery of novel and efficient heterogeneous catalysts for various chemical processes. In such studies, the candidate catalyst material is modeled using tens to thousands of chemical species and elementary reactions. Density Functional Theory (DFT) is widely used to calculate the thermochemistry of these species which might be surface species or gas-phase molecules. The use of an approximate exchange correlation functional in the DFT framework introduces an important source of error in such models. This is especially true in the calculation of gas phase molecules whose thermochemistry is calculated using the same planewave basis set as the rest of the surface mechanism. Unfortunately, the nature and magnitude of these errors is unknown for most practical molecules. Here, we investigate the error in the enthalpy of formation for 1676 gaseous species using two different DFT levels of theory and the 'ground truth values' obtained from the NIST database. We featurize molecules using graph theory. We use a regularized algorithm to discover a sparse model of the error and identify important molecular fragments that drive this error. The model is robust to rigorous statistical tests and is used to correct DFT thermochemistry, achieving more than an order of magnitude improvement.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.007 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it