journal article·2025-12-12Open access

FALCON: fast active learning for machine learning potentials in atomistic and ab initio molecular dynamics simulations

Noah Felis, Wilke Dononelli

npj Computational Materials· Volume 12· Issue 1

Abstract

Abstract Machine Learning (ML) potentials can be used for the construction of potential energy surfaces (PES) to avoid computationally expensive ab initio methods. However, many such applications still require a significant number of first-principles calculations to train the ML model, prior to use. Active learning methods can address this issue by performing these calculations and trainings “on-the-fly” (OTF), based on the ML model’s uncertainty estimation. Nevertheless, current active learning approaches suffer from problems in complex simulations were frequent retraining is required, since repeated training of a large ML model increases training times substantially. This work presents a solution to this limitation by introducing the FALCON ( F ast A ctive L earning for C omputational ab initio m O lecular dy N amics) calculator. Instead of relying on a single large ML model, FALCON clusters the training data into subsets of similar structures and distributes them across multiple smaller ML models. This approach significantly increases the efficiency of the OTF training, drastically reducing the computational cost of training-intensive simulations. The use of FALCON is demonstrated on various molecular dynamics (MD) simulations of bulk metals, metal clusters, cathode materials and water diffusion in a carbon nanotube. However, the FALCON calculator is highly flexible and could be easily adapted for various applications and different ML models.
Source: crossref · Quality: baseline

Research context

OpenAlex topics: Machine Learning in Materials Science · Advanced Chemical Physics Studies · Advanced Electron Microscopy Techniques and Applications

SciVX discovery tags are terminology-based. OpenAlex topics are source-provided classifications.

References (64)

Show source-provided references
1. Westermayr, J., Gastegger, M., Schütt, K. T. & Maurer, R. J. Perspective on integrating machine learning into computational chemistry and materials science. J. Chem. Phys 154, 230903 (2021).10.1063/5.0047760 ↗
2. Dral, P. O. Quantum chemistry in the age of machine learning. J. Phys. Chem. Lett. 11, 2336–2347 (2020).10.1021/acs.jpclett.9b03664 ↗
3. von Lilienfeld, O. A. & Burke, K. Retrospective on a decade of machine learning for chemical discovery. Nat. Commun. 11, 4895 (2020).10.1038/s41467-020-18556-9 ↗
4. Christiansen, M.-P. V., Rønne, N. & Hammer, B. Atomistic global optimization x: a Python package for optimization of atomistic structures. J. Chem. Phys 157, 054701 (2022).10.1063/5.0094165 ↗
5. Bisbo, M. K. & Hammer, B. Efficient global structure optimization with a machine-learned surrogate model. Phys. Rev. Lett. 124, 086102 (2020).10.1103/PhysRevLett.124.086102 ↗
6. Yang, Y., Jiménez-Negrón, O. A. & Kitchin, J. R. Machine-learning accelerated geometry optimization in molecular simulation. J. Chem. Phys. 154, 234704 (2021).10.1063/5.0049665 ↗
7. Elton, D. C., Boukouvalas, Z., Fuge, M. D. & Chung, P. W. Deep learning for molecular design—a review of the state of the art. Mol. Syst. Des. Eng. 4, 828–849 (2019).10.1039/C9ME00039A ↗
8. Freeze, J. G., Kelly, H. R. & Batista, V. S. Search for catalysts by inverse design: artificial intelligence, mountain climbers, and alchemists. Chem. Rev. 119, 6595–6612 (2019).10.1021/acs.chemrev.8b00759 ↗
9. Gómez-Bombarelli, R. et al. Automatic chemical design using a data-driven continuous representation of molecules. ACS Cent. Sci. 4, 268–276 (2018).10.1021/acscentsci.7b00572 ↗
10. Caro, M. A., Aarva, A., Deringer, V. L., Csányi, G. & Laurila, T. Reactivity of amorphous carbon surfaces: rationalizing the role of structural motifs in functionalization using machine learning. Chem. Mater. 30, 7446–7455 (2018).10.1021/acs.chemmater.8b03353 ↗
11. Jinnouchi, R., Lahnsteiner, J., Karsai, F., Kresse, G. & Bokdam, M. Phase transitions of hybrid perovskites simulated by machine-learning force fields trained on the fly with Bayesian inference. Phys. Rev. Lett. 122, 225701 (2019).10.1103/PhysRevLett.122.225701 ↗
12. Lim, J. S. et al. Evolution of metastable structures at bimetallic surfaces from microscopy and machine-learning molecular dynamics. J. Am. Chem. Soc. 142, 15907–15916 (2020).10.1021/jacs.0c06401 ↗
13. Fedik, N. et al. Extending machine learning beyond interatomic potentials for predicting molecular properties. Nat. Rev. Chem. 6, 653–672 (2022).10.1038/s41570-022-00416-3 ↗
14. Behler, J. & Parrinello, M. Generalized neural-network representation of high-dimensional potential-energy surfaces. Phys. Rev. Lett. 98, 146401 (2007).10.1103/PhysRevLett.98.146401 ↗
15. Bartók, A. P., Payne, M. C., Kondor, R. & Csányi, G. Gaussian approximation potentials: The accuracy of quantum mechanics, without the electrons. Phys. Rev. Lett. 104, 136403 (2010).10.1103/PhysRevLett.104.136403 ↗
16. Schütt, K. T., Sauceda, H. E., Kindermans, P.-J., Tkatchenko, A. & Müller, K.-R. Schnet-a deep learning architecture for molecules and materials. J. Chem. Phys. 148, 241722 (2018).10.1063/1.5019779 ↗
17. Deringer, V. L., Caro, M. A. & Csányi, G. Machine learning interatomic potentials as emerging tools for materials science. Adv. Mater. 31, 1902765 (2019).10.1002/adma.201902765 ↗
18. Mueller, T., Hernandez, A. & Wang, C. Machine learning for interatomic potential models. J. Chem. Phys. 152, 050902 (2020).10.1063/1.5126336 ↗
19. Unke, O. T. et al. Machine learning force fields. Chem. Rev. 121, 10142–10186 (2021).10.1021/acs.chemrev.0c01111 ↗
20. Schuütt, K. et al. Schnetpack: A deep learning toolbox for atomistic systems. J. Chem. Theory Comput. 15, 448–455 (2018).10.1021/acs.jctc.8b00908 ↗
21. Wang, H. et al. Deepmd-kit: A deep learning package for many-body potential energy representation and molecular dynamics. Comput. Phys. Commun. 228, 178–184 (2018).10.1016/j.cpc.2018.03.016 ↗
22. Vandermause, J. et al. On-the-fly active learning of interpretable Bayesian force fields for atomistic rare events. Npj Comput. Mater. 6, 20 (2020).10.1038/s41524-020-0283-z ↗
23. Batatia, I., Kovacs, D. P., Simm, G., Ortner, C. & Csányi, G. Mace: Higher order equivariant message passing neural networks for fast and accurate force fields. Adv. Neural Inf. Process. Syst. 35, 11423–11436 (2022).
24. Vandermause, J., Xie, Y., Lim, J. S., Owen, C. J. & Kozinsky, B. Active learning of reactive Bayesian force fields applied to heterogeneous catalysis dynamics of h/pt. Nat. Commun. 13, 5183 (2022).10.1038/s41467-022-32294-0 ↗
25. Batatia, I. et al. A foundation model for atomistic materials chemistry. J. Chem. Phys. 163, 184110 (2025).10.1063/5.0297006 ↗
26. Batzner, S. et al. E (3)-equivariant graph neural networks for data-efficient and accurate interatomic potentials. Nat. Commun. 13, 2453 (2022).10.1038/s41467-022-29939-5 ↗
27. Choudhary, K. et al. Unified graph neural network force-field for the periodic table: solid state applications. Digit. Discov. 2, 346–355 (2023).10.1039/D2DD00096B ↗
28. Deng, B. et al. Chgnet as a pretrained universal neural network potential for charge-informed atomistic modelling. Nat. Mach. Intell. 5, 1031–1041 (2023).10.1038/s42256-023-00716-3 ↗
29. Musaelian, A. et al. Learning local equivariant representations for large-scale atomistic dynamics. Nat. Commun. 14, 579 (2023).10.1038/s41467-023-36329-y ↗
30. Schütt, K. T., Hessmann, S. S., Gebauer, N. W., Lederer, J. & Gastegger, M. Schnetpack 2.0: a neural network toolbox for atomistic machine learning. J. Chem. Phys. 158, 144801 (2023).10.1063/5.0138367 ↗
31. Xie, S. R., Rupp, M. & Hennig, R. G. Ultra-fast interpretable machine-learning potentials. npj Comput. Mater. 9, 162 (2023).10.1038/s41524-023-01092-7 ↗
32. Park, Y., Kim, J., Hwang, S. & Han, S. Scalable parallel algorithm for graph neural network interatomic potentials in molecular dynamics simulations. J. Chem. Theory Comput. 20, 4857–4868 (2024).10.1021/acs.jctc.4c00190 ↗
33. Zeng, J. et al. Deepmd-kit v2: A software package for deep potential models. J. Chem. Phys. 159, 054801 (2023).10.1063/5.0155600 ↗
34. Xie, F., Lu, T., Meng, S. & Liu, M. Gptff: A high-accuracy out-of-the-box universal AI force field for arbitrary inorganic materials. Sci. Bull. 69, 3525–3532 (2024).10.1016/j.scib.2024.08.039 ↗
35. Isayev, O., Anstine, D. & Zubaiuk, R. Aimnet2: a neural network potential to meet your neutral, charged, organic, and elemental-organic needs. Chem. Sci. 16, 10228–10244 (2025).10.1039/D4SC08572H ↗
36. Kovács, D. P. et al. Mace-off: Short-range transferable machine learning force fields for organic molecules. J. Am. Chem. Soc. 147, 17598–17611 (2025).10.1021/jacs.4c07099 ↗
37. Campisi, D., Tielens, A. G. G. M. & Dononelli, W. The role of point defect reconstructions and polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons in silicate dust preservation. Month. Not. R. Astronom. Soc. 533, 2282–2293 (2024).10.1093/mnras/stae1962 ↗
38. Jinnouchi, R., Miwa, K., Karsai, F., Kresse, G. & Asahi, R. On-the-fly active learning of interatomic potentials for large-scale atomistic simulations. J. Phys. Chem. Lett. 11, 6946–6955 (2020).10.1021/acs.jpclett.0c01061 ↗
39. Deringer, V. L. et al. Gaussian process regression for materials and molecules. Chem. Rev. 121, 10073–10141 (2021).10.1021/acs.chemrev.1c00022 ↗
40. Hjorth Larsen, A. et al. The atomic simulation environment—a Python library for working with atoms. J. Phys.: Condens. Matter 29, 273002 (2017).
41. Rønne, N. et al. Atomistic structure search using local surrogate model. J. Chem. Phys 157, 174115 (2022).10.1063/5.0121748 ↗
42. Larsen, A. H. et al. The atomic simulation environment—a Python library for working with atoms. J. Condens. Matter Phys. 29, 273002 (2017).10.1088/1361-648X/aa680e ↗
43. Jacobsen, K., Stoltze, P. & Nørskov, J. A semi-empirical effective medium theory for metals and alloys. Surf. Sci. 366, 394–402 (1996).10.1016/0039-6028(96)00816-3 ↗
44. Cezar, H. M., Rondina, G. G. & Da Silva, J. L. F. Thermodynamic properties of 55-atom Pt-based nanoalloys: phase changes and structural effects on the electronic properties. J. Chem. Phys. 151, 204301 (2019).10.1063/1.5125689 ↗
45. Ignatov, S. K., Razuvaev, A. G., Loginova, A. S. & Masunov, A. E. Global structure optimization of Pt clusters based on the modified empirical potentials, calibrated using density functional theory. J. Phys. Chem. C 123, 29024–29036 (2019).10.1021/acs.jpcc.9b08691 ↗
46. Kang, J., Kim, B.-H., Seo, M. H. & Lee, J. Sampling rare events using nanostructures for universal pt neural network potential. Curr. Appl. Phys. 66, 110–114 (2024).10.1016/j.cap.2024.07.005 ↗
47. Liu, H., Ong, Y.-S., Shen, X. & Cai, J. When Gaussian process meets big data: a review of scalable GPS. IEEE Trans. neural Netw. Learn. Syst. 31, 4405–4423 (2020).10.1109/TNNLS.2019.2957109 ↗
48. Kisi, O. et al. Integration of gaussian process regression and k means clustering for enhanced short term rainfall runoff modeling. Sci. Rep. 15, 7444 (2025).10.1038/s41598-025-91339-8 ↗
49. Bartók, A. P., Kondor, R. & Csányi, G. On representing chemical environments. Phys. Rev. B—Condens. Matter Mater. Phys. 87, 184115 (2013).10.1103/PhysRevB.87.184115 ↗
50. De, S., Bartók, A. P., Csányi, G. & Ceriotti, M. Comparing molecules and solids across structural and alchemical space. Phys. Chem. Chem. Phys. 18, 13754–13769 (2016).10.1039/C6CP00415F ↗
51. Himanen, L. et al. DScribe: Library of descriptors for machine learning in materials science. Comput. Phys. Commun. 247, 106949 (2020).10.1016/j.cpc.2019.106949 ↗
52. Laakso, J. et al. Updates to the dscribe library: New descriptors and derivatives. J. Chem. Phys. 158, 234802 (2023).10.1063/5.0151031 ↗
53. Gkoura, L. et al. The peculiar size and temperature dependence of water diffusion in carbon nanotubes studied with 2d NMR diffusion-relaxation d-T2eff spectroscopy. Biomicrofluidics 14, 034114 (2020).10.1063/5.0005398 ↗
54. Valle, M. & Oganov, A. R. Crystal fingerprint space–a novel paradigm for studying crystal-structure sets. Acta Crystallogr. A 66, 507–517 (2010).10.1107/S0108767310026395 ↗
55. Pedregosa, F. et al. Scikit-learn: machine learning in Python. J. Mach. Learn. Res. 12, 2825–2830 (2011).
56. Jacobsen, K. W., Stoltze, P. & Nørskov, J. A semi-empirical effective medium theory for metals and alloys. Surf. Sci. 366, 394–402 (1996).10.1016/0039-6028(96)00816-3 ↗
57. Kresse, G. & Furthmüller, J. Efficient iterative schemes for ab initio total-energy calculations using a plane-wave basis set. Phys. Rev. B 54, 11169 (1996).10.1103/PhysRevB.54.11169 ↗
58. Perdew, J. P., Burke, K. & Ernzerhof, M. Generalized gradient approximation made simple. Phys. Rev. Lett. 77, 3865 (1996).10.1103/PhysRevLett.77.3865 ↗
59. Press, W. H. Numerical Recipes in C. Cambridge University Press: Cambridge, 1992.
60. Nocedal, J., Wright, S. J. Numerical Optimization. Springer: Berlin/Heidelberg, 1999.10.1007/b98874 ↗
61. Allen, M. P., Tildesley, D. J. Computer Simulation of Liquids. Clarendon: Oxford, 1987.
62. Hanwell, M. D. et al. Avogadro: an advanced semantic chemical editor, visualization, and analysis platform. J. Cheminf. 4, 1–17 (2012).10.1186/1758-2946-4-17 ↗
63. Persistence of Vision Pty. Ltd., persistence of vision (tm) raytracer (2004).
64. Hunter, J. D. Matplotlib: a 2d graphics environment. Comput. Sci. Eng. 9, 90–95 (2007).10.1109/MCSE.2007.55 ↗