Neural network Gaussian processes as efficient models of potential energy surfaces for polyatomic molecules
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract Kernel models of potential energy surfaces (PESs) for polyatomic molecules are often restricted by a specific choice of the kernel function. This can be avoided by optimizing the complexity of the kernel function. For regression problems with very expensive data, the functional form of the model kernels can be optimized in the Gaussian process (GP) setting through compositional function search guided by the Bayesian information criterion. However, the compositional kernel search is computationally demanding and relies on greedy strategies, which may yield sub-optimal kernels. An alternative strategy of increasing complexity of GP kernels treats a GP as a Bayesian neural network (NN) with a variable number of hidden layers, which yields NNGP models. Here, we present a direct comparison of GP models with composite kernels and NNGP models for applications aiming at the construction of global PES for polyatomic molecules. We show that NNGP models of PES can be trained much more efficiently and yield better generalization accuracy without relying on any specific form of the kernel function. We illustrate that NNGP models trained by distributions of energy points at low energies produce accurate predictions of PES at high energies. We also illustrate that NNGP models can extrapolate in the input variable space by building the free energy surface of the Heisenberg model trained in the paramagnetic phase and validated in the ferromagnetic phase. By construction, composite kernels yield more accurate models than kernels with a fixed functional form. Therefore, by illustrating that NNGP models outperform GP models with composite kernels, our work suggests that NNGP models should be a preferred choice of kernel models for PES.
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 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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".