Fast Evaluation of the Adsorption Energy ofOrganic Molecules on Metals via GraphNeural Networks
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Modeling of solid-state material-molecule interfaces in heterogeneous catalysis requires the extensive evaluation of the energy of molecules on surfaces. Obtaining the binding energy of many configurations of large organic molecules requires a vast amount of computational time with density functional theory (DFT). Here, we use a graph neural network (GNN) to evaluate the adsorption energy of molecular species adsorbed on metallic surfaces. The GNN is trained on a set of C1–4 fragments including N, O, S heteroatoms and C6–10 aromatic rings. Compared to DFT, the GNN shows a mean absolute error (MAE) of 0.17 eV on the test set being 6 orders of magnitude faster. When applying the trained model with subsequent hyperparameter optimization to molecules of industrial interest (biomass, plastics and polyurethanes precursors) containing up to 22 carbon atoms, the prediction performance for the adsorption energy yields a MAE of 0.03 eV/(non-H atom). While the error for out-of-distribution molecules is higher, it is still within the acceptable limit for adsorption energies (0.05 eV/atom), confirming the viability of the approach. The proposed framework represents a potential tool for the fast screening of catalytic materials, as well as their inverse design, enabling the multi-scale modeling for systems that cannot be easily simulated by DFT.
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.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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 itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".