journal article·2023-09-02Open access

Ultra-fast interpretable machine-learning potentials

Stephen R. Xie, Matthias Rupp, Richard G. Hennig

npj Computational Materials· Volume 9· Issue 1

Abstract

Abstract All-atom dynamics simulations are an indispensable quantitative tool in physics, chemistry, and materials science, but large systems and long simulation times remain challenging due to the trade-off between computational efficiency and predictive accuracy. To address this challenge, we combine effective two- and three-body potentials in a cubic B-spline basis with regularized linear regression to obtain machine-learning potentials that are physically interpretable, sufficiently accurate for applications, as fast as the fastest traditional empirical potentials, and two to four orders of magnitude faster than state-of-the-art machine-learning potentials. For data from empirical potentials, we demonstrate the exact retrieval of the potential. For data from density functional theory, the predicted energies, forces, and derived properties, including phonon spectra, elastic constants, and melting points, closely match those of the reference method. The introduced potentials might contribute towards accurate all-atom dynamics simulations of large atomistic systems over long-time scales.
Source: crossref · Quality: baseline

Research context

OpenAlex topics: Machine Learning in Materials Science · X-ray Diffraction in Crystallography · Fuel Cells and Related Materials

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

References (64)

Show source-provided references
1. 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 ↗
2. Langer, M. F., Goeßmann, A. & Rupp, M. Representations of molecules and materials for interpolation of quantum-mechanical simulations via machine learning. npj Comput. Mater. 8, 41 (2022).10.1038/s41524-022-00721-x ↗
3. Miksch, A. M., Morawietz, T., Kästner, J., Urban, A. & Artrith, N. Strategies for the construction of machine-learning potentials for accurate and efficient atomic-scale simulations. Mach. Learn. Sci. Tech. 2, 031001 (2021).10.1088/2632-2153/abfd96 ↗
4. Friederich, P., Häse, F., Proppe, J. & Aspuru-Guzik, A. Machine-learned potentials for next-generation matter simulations. Nat. Mater. 20, 750–761 (2021).10.1038/s41563-020-0777-6 ↗
5. Drautz, R., Fähnle, M. & Sanchez, J. M. General relations between many-body potentials and cluster expansions in multicomponent systems. J. Phys. 16, 3843–3852 (2004).
6. Rapaport, D. The Art of Molecular Dynamics Simulation (Cambridge University Press, 2004).10.1017/CBO9780511816581 ↗
7. Martinez, J. A., Yilmaz, D. E., Liang, T., Sinnott, S. B. & Phillpot, S. R. Fitting empirical potentials: challenges and methodologies. Curr. Opin. Solid State Mater. Sci 17, 263–270 (2013).10.1016/j.cossms.2013.09.001 ↗
8. Ragasa, E. J., O’Brien, C. J., Hennig, R. G., Foiles, S. M. & Phillpot, S. R. Multi-objective optimization of interatomic potentials with application to MgO. Model. Simul. Mater. Sci. Eng. 27, 074007 (2019).10.1088/1361-651X/ab28d9 ↗
9. Jones, J. E. On the determination of molecular fields.—I. from the variation of the viscosity of a gas with temperature. Proc. R. Soc. Lond. A 106, 441–462 (1924).10.1098/rspa.1924.0081 ↗
10. Morse, P. M. Diatomic molecules according to the wave mechanics. II. vibrational levels. Phys. Rev. 34, 57–64 (1929).10.1103/PhysRev.34.57 ↗
11. Daw, M. S. & Baskes, M. I. Embedded-atom method: Derivation and application to impurities, surfaces, and other defects in metals. Phys. Rev. B 29, 6443–6453 (1984).10.1103/PhysRevB.29.6443 ↗
12. Musil, F. et al. Physics-inspired structural representations for molecules and materials. Chem. Rev. 121, 9759–9815 (2021).10.1021/acs.chemrev.1c00021 ↗
13. Deringer, V. L. et al. Gaussian process regression for materials and molecules. Chem. Rev. 121, 10073–10141 (2021).10.1021/acs.chemrev.1c00022 ↗
14. Huang, B. & von Lilienfeld, O. A. Ab initio machine learning in chemical compound space. Chem. Rev. 121, 10001–10036 (2021).10.1021/acs.chemrev.0c01303 ↗
15. Behler, J. Four generations of high-dimensional neural network potentials. Chem. Rev. 121, 10037–10072 (2021).10.1021/acs.chemrev.0c00868 ↗
16. Unke, O. T. et al. Machine learning force fields. Chem. Rev. 121, 10142–10186 (2021).10.1021/acs.chemrev.0c01111 ↗
17. Parsaeifard, B. et al. An assessment of the structural resolution of various fingerprints commonly used in machine learning. Mach. Learn.: Sci. Technol. 2, 015018 (2021).
18. Zuo, Y. et al. Performance and cost assessment of machine learning interatomic potentials. J. Phys. Chem. A 124, 731–745 (2020).10.1021/acs.jpca.9b08723 ↗
19. Lysogorskiy, Y. et al. Performant implementation of the atomic cluster expansion (PACE) and application to copper and silicon. npj Comput. Mater. 7, 97 (2021).10.1038/s41524-021-00559-9 ↗
20. Kovács, D. P. et al. Linear atomic cluster expansion force fields for organic molecules: beyond RMSE. J. Chem. Theor. Comput. 17, 7696–7711 (2021).10.1021/acs.jctc.1c00647 ↗
21. Thompson, A., Swiler, L., Trott, C., Foiles, S. & Tucker, G. Spectral neighbor analysis method for automated generation of quantum-accurate interatomic potentials. J. Comput. Phys. 285, 316–330 (2015).10.1016/j.jcp.2014.12.018 ↗
22. Wood, M. A. & Thompson, A. P. Extending the accuracy of the SNAP interatomic potential form. J. Chem. Phys. 148, 241721 (2018).10.1063/1.5017641 ↗
23. 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 ↗
24. Shapeev, A. V. Moment tensor potentials: a class of systematically improvable interatomic potentials. Multiscale Model. Simul. 14, 1153–1173 (2016).10.1137/15M1054183 ↗
25. Drautz, R. Atomic cluster expansion for accurate and transferable interatomic potentials. Phys. Rev. B 99, 14104 (2019).10.1103/PhysRevB.99.014104 ↗
26. van der Oord, C., Dusson, G., Csányi, G. & Ortner, C. Regularised atomic body-ordered permutation-invariant polynomials for the construction of interatomic potentials. Mach. Learn. 1, 015004 (2020).
27. Lindsey, R. K., Fried, L. E. & Goldman, N. ChIMES: a force matched potential with explicit three-body interactions for molten carbon. J. Chem. Theory Comput. 13, 6222–6229 (2017).10.1021/acs.jctc.7b00867 ↗
28. 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 ↗
29. Pozdnyakov, S., Oganov, A. R., Mazhnik, E., Mazitov, A. & Kruglov, I. Fast general two- and three-body interatomic potential. Phys. Rev. B 107, 125160 (2023).10.1103/PhysRevB.107.125160 ↗
30. 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 ↗
31. Bircher, M. P., Singraber, A. & Dellago, C. Improved description of atomic environments using low-cost polynomial functions with compact support. Mach. Learn. 2, 035026 (2021).
32. Vita, J. A. & Trinkle, D. R. Exploring the necessary complexity of interatomic potentials. Comput. Mater. Sci. 200, 110752 (2021).10.1016/j.commatsci.2021.110752 ↗
33. Szlachta, W. J., Bartók, A. P. & Csányi, G. Accuracy and transferability of Gaussian approximation potential models for tungsten. Phys. Rev. B 90, 104108 (2014).10.1103/PhysRevB.90.104108 ↗
34. Xie, S. & Rupp, M. Ultra fast force fields package. https://github.com/uf3 (2021).
35. 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 ↗
36. Plimpton, S. Fast parallel algorithms for short-range molecular dynamics. J. Comput. Phys. 117, 1–19 (1995).10.1006/jcph.1995.1039 ↗
37. Thompson, A. P. et al. LAMMPS—a flexible simulation tool for particle-based materials modeling at the atomic, meso, and continuum scales. Comput. Phys. Comm. 271, 108171 (2022).10.1016/j.cpc.2021.108171 ↗
38. de Boor, C. A Practical Guide to Splines (Springer, New York, 1978).10.1007/978-1-4612-6333-3 ↗
39. Runge, C. Über empirische Funktionen und die Interpolation zwischen äquidistanten Ordinaten. Z. Math. Phys. 46, 224–243 (1901).
40. Wolff, D. & Rudd, W. Tabulated potentials in molecular dynamics simulations. Comput. Phys. Commun. 120, 20–32 (1999).10.1016/S0010-4655(99)00217-9 ↗
41. Wen, M., Whalen, S. M., Elliott, R. S. & Tadmor, E. B. Interpolation effects in tabulated interatomic potentials. Model. Simul. Mater. Sci. Eng. 23, 074008 (2015).10.1088/0965-0393/23/7/074008 ↗
42. Hennig, R., Lenosky, T., Trinkle, D., Rudin, S. & Wilkins, J. Classical potential describes martensitic phase transformations between the α, β, and ω titanium phases. Phys. Rev. B 78, 054121 (2008).10.1103/PhysRevB.78.054121 ↗
43. Whittaker, E. T. On a new method of graduation. Proc. Edinb. Math. Soc. 41, 63–75 (1922).10.1017/S0013091500077853 ↗
44. Eilers, P. H. & Marx, B. D. Flexible smoothing with B-splines and penalties. Statist. Sci. 11, 89–121 (1996).10.1214/ss/1038425655 ↗
45. Schoenberg, I. J. Spline functions and the problem of graduation. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA 52, 947–950 (1964).10.1073/pnas.52.4.947 ↗
46. Reinsch, C. H. Smoothing by spline functions. Numer. Math. 10, 177–183 (1967).10.1007/BF02162161 ↗
47. Stakgold, I. The Cauchy relations in a molecular theory of elasticity. Q. Appl. Math. 8, 169–186 (1950).10.1090/qam/36650 ↗
48. Ziegenhain, G., Hartmaier, A. & Urbassek, H. M. Pair vs many-body potentials: influence on elastic and plastic behavior in nanoindentation of fcc metals. J. Mech. Phys. Solids 57, 1514–1526 (2009).10.1016/j.jmps.2009.05.011 ↗
49. Marinica, M.-C. et al. Interatomic potentials for modelling radiation defects and dislocations in tungsten. J. Phys. 25, 395502 (2013).
50. Wang, L. G., van de Walle, A. & Alfè, D. Melting temperature of tungsten from two ab initio approaches. Phys. Rev. B 84, 092102 (2011).10.1103/PhysRevB.84.092102 ↗
51. Li, J., Qu, C. & Bowman, J. M. Diffusion Monte Carlo with fictitious masses finds holes in potential energy surfaces. Mol. Phys. 119, e1976426 (2021).10.1080/00268976.2021.1976426 ↗
52. Wood, M. A. & Thompson, A. P. Quantum-accurate molecular dynamics potential for tungsten, technical report SAND2017-3265R, (Sandia National Laboratories, 2017). https://doi.org/10.2172/1365473.10.2172/1365473 ↗
53. Perdew, J. P., Burke, K. & Ernzerhof, M. Generalized gradient approximation made simple. Phys. Rev. Lett. 77, 3865–3868 (1996).10.1103/PhysRevLett.77.3865 ↗
54. Virtanen, P. et al. SciPy 1.0: fundamental algorithms for scientific computing in Python. Nat. Methods 17, 261–272 (2020).10.1038/s41592-019-0686-2 ↗
55. Ong, S. P. Accelerating materials science with high-throughput computations and machine learning. Comput. Mater. Sci. 161, 143–150 (2019).10.1016/j.commatsci.2019.01.013 ↗
56. Bartók, A. P., Kondor, R. & Csányi, G. On representing chemical environments. Phys. Rev. B 87, 184115 (2013).10.1103/PhysRevB.87.184115 ↗
57. Bartók, A. P. & Csányi, G. Gaussian approximation potentials: a brief tutorial introduction. Int. J. Quant. Chem. 116, 1051–1057 (2015).10.1002/qua.24927 ↗
58. Becker, C. A., Tavazza, F., Trautt, Z. T. & Buarque De Macedo, R. A. Considerations for choosing and using force fields and interatomic potentials in materials science and engineering. Curr. Opin. Solid State Mater. Sci 17, 277–283 (2013).10.1016/j.cossms.2013.10.001 ↗
59. Hale, L. M., Trautt, Z. T. & Becker, C. A. Evaluating variability with atomistic simulations: The effect of potential and calculation methodology on the modeling of lattice and elastic constants. Model. Simul. Mater. Sci. Eng. 26, 055003 (2018).10.1088/1361-651X/aabc05 ↗
60. Novikov, I. S., Gubaev, K., Podryabinkin, E. V. & Shapeev, A. V. The MLIP package: moment tensor potentials with MPI and active learning. Mach. Learn. 2, 025002 (2021).
61. Jochym, P. T. & Badger, C. jochym/elastic: Maintenance release. https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.1254570 (2018).10.5281/zenodo.1254570 ↗
62. Togo, A. & Tanaka, I. First principles phonon calculations in materials science. Scr. Mater. 108, 1–5 (2015).10.1016/j.scriptamat.2015.07.021 ↗
63. Csanyi, G. Gaussian approximation potential for tungsten. https://www.repository.cam.ac.uk/handle/1810/341742 (2022).
64. Csanyi, G. Research data: Machine learning a general-purpose interatomic potential for silicon. https://www.repository.cam.ac.uk/handle/1810/317974 (2021).