Transition state search and geometry relaxation throughout chemical compound space with quantum machine learning
Bibliographic record
Abstract
We use energies and forces predicted within response operator based quantum machine learning (OQML) to perform geometry optimization and transition state search calculations with legacy optimizers but without the need for subsequent re-optimization with quantum chemistry methods. For randomly sampled initial coordinates of small organic query molecules, we report systematic improvement of equilibrium and transition state geometry output as training set sizes increase. Out-of-sample SN2 reactant complexes and transition state geometries have been predicted using the LBFGS and the QST2 algorithms with an root-mean-square deviation (RMSD) of 0.16 and 0.4 Å—after training on up to 200 reactant complex relaxations and transition state search trajectories from the QMrxn20 dataset, respectively. For geometry optimizations, we have also considered relaxation paths up to 5’595 constitutional isomers with sum formula C7H10O2 from the QM9-database. Using the resulting OQML models with an LBFGS optimizer reproduces the minimum geometry with an RMSD of 0.14 Å, only using ∼6000 training points obtained from normal mode sampling along the optimization paths of the training compounds without the need for active learning. For converged equilibrium and transition state geometries, subsequent vibrational normal mode frequency analysis indicates deviation from MP2 reference results by on average 14 and 26 cm−1, respectively. While the numerical cost for OQML predictions is negligible in comparison to density functional theory or MP2, the number of steps until convergence is typically larger in either case. The success rate for reaching convergence, however, improves systematically with training set size, underscoring OQML’s potential for universal applicability.
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 | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.004 | 0.001 |
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".