MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4396705532 · doi:10.26434/chemrxiv-2024-bhprr

Modeling Intermolecular Interactions With XDM Dispersion Corrections to Neural Network Potentials

2024· preprint· en· W4396705532 on OpenAlexafffund
Nguyễn Thiên Phúc Từ, Siri Williamson, Erin R. Johnson, Christopher N. Rowley

Bibliographic record

VenueChemRxiv · 2024
Typepreprint
Languageen
FieldMaterials Science
TopicMachine Learning in Materials Science
Canadian institutionsDalhousie UniversityCarleton University
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada
KeywordsArtificial neural networkDispersion (optics)DipoleIntermolecular forceDensity functional theoryAb initioStatistical physicsMoment (physics)Computer sciencePhysicsQuantum mechanicsMachine learning

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Neural network potentials (NNPs) are an innovative approach for calculating the potential energy and forces of a chemical system. In principle, these methods are capable of modeling large systems with an accuracy approaching that of a high-level ab initio calculation but with a much smaller computational cost. Due to their training to density-functional theory (DFT) data and neglect of long-range interactions, some classes of NNPs require an additional term to include London dispersion physics. In this perspective, we discuss the requirements for a dispersion model for use with an NNP, focusing on the MLXDM (Machine Learned eXchange Hole Dipole Moment) model developed by our groups. This model is based on the DFT-based XDM dispersion correction, which calculates interatomic dispersion coefficients in terms of atomic moments and polarizabilities, both of which can be effectively approximated using neural networks.

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 distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow), Scholarly communication, Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.232
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0010.003
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.001

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.

Opus teacher head0.016
GPT teacher head0.281
Teacher spread0.266 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; both teacher heads agree on what is shown here.

Study designSimulation or modeling
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations0
Published2024
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueChemRxivSame topicMachine Learning in Materials ScienceFrench-language works237,207