Bridging the gap between high-level quantum chemical methods and deep learning models
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract Supervised deep learning (DL) models are becoming ubiquitous in computational chemistry because they can efficiently learn complex input-output relationships and predict chemical properties at a cost significantly lower than methods based on quantum mechanics. The central challenge in many DL applications is the need to invest considerable computational resources in generating large ( <mml:math xmlns:mml="http://www.w3.org/1998/Math/MathML" overflow="scroll"> <mml:mi>N</mml:mi> <mml:mo>></mml:mo> <mml:mn>1</mml:mn> <mml:mo>×</mml:mo> <mml:msup> <mml:mn>10</mml:mn> <mml:mn>5</mml:mn> </mml:msup> </mml:math> ) training sets such that the resulting DL model can be generalized reliably to unseen systems. The lack of better alternatives has encouraged the use of low-cost and relatively inaccurate density-functional theory (DFT) methods to generate training data, leading to DL models that lack accuracy and reliability. In this article, we describe a robust and easily implemented approach based on property-specific atom-centered potentials (ACPs) that resolves this central challenge in DL model development. ACPs are one-electron potentials that are applied in combination with a computationally inexpensive but inaccurate quantum mechanical method (e.g. double- ζ DFT) and fitted against relatively few high-level data ( <mml:math xmlns:mml="http://www.w3.org/1998/Math/MathML" overflow="scroll"> <mml:mi>N</mml:mi> <mml:mo>≈</mml:mo> <mml:mn>1</mml:mn> <mml:mo>×</mml:mo> <mml:msup> <mml:mn>10</mml:mn> <mml:mrow> <mml:mn>3</mml:mn> </mml:mrow> </mml:msup> </mml:math> – <mml:math xmlns:mml="http://www.w3.org/1998/Math/MathML" overflow="scroll"> <mml:mn>1</mml:mn> <mml:mo>×</mml:mo> <mml:msup> <mml:mn>10</mml:mn> <mml:mrow> <mml:mn>4</mml:mn> </mml:mrow> </mml:msup> </mml:math> ), possibly obtained from the literature. The resulting ACP-corrected methods retain the low cost of the double- ζ DFT approach, while generating high-level-quality data in unseen systems for the specific property for which they were designed. With this approach, we demonstrate that ACPs can be used as an intermediate method between high-level approaches and DL model development, enabling the calculation of large and accurate DL training sets for the chemical property of interest. We demonstrate the effectiveness of the proposed approach by predicting bond dissociation enthalpies, reaction barrier heights, and reaction energies with chemical accuracy at a computational cost lower than the DFT methods routinely used for DL training data set generation.
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 | 0.003 | 0.008 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.004 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 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".