On-the-fly active learning of interpretable Bayesian force fields for atomistic rare events
Source abstract
Abstract
Abstract Machine learned force fields typically require manual construction of training sets consisting of thousands of first principles calculations, which can result in low training efficiency and unpredictable errors when applied to structures not represented in the training set of the model. This severely limits the practical application of these models in systems with dynamics governed by important rare events, such as chemical reactions and diffusion. We present an adaptive Bayesian inference method for automating the training of interpretable, low-dimensional, and multi-element interatomic force fields using structures drawn on the fly from molecular dynamics simulations. Within an active learning framework, the internal uncertainty of a Gaussian process regression model is used to decide whether to accept the model prediction or to perform a first principles calculation to augment the training set of the model. The method is applied to a range of single- and multi-element systems and shown to achieve a favorable balance of accuracy and computational efficiency, while requiring a minimal amount of ab initio training data. We provide a fully open-source implementation of our method, as well as a procedure to map trained models to computationally efficient tabulated force fields.
Source: crossref · Quality: baseline
Research context
OpenAlex topics: Gaussian Processes and Bayesian Inference · Machine Learning in Materials Science · Machine Learning and Algorithms
SciVX discovery tags are terminology-based. OpenAlex topics are source-provided classifications.
References (55)
Show source-provided references
1. 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 ↗
2. Behler, J. Neural network potential-energy surfaces in chemistry: a tool for large-scale simulations. Phys. Chem. Chem. Phys. 13, 17930–17955 (2011).10.1039/c1cp21668f ↗
3. Thompson, A. P., Swiler, L. P., Trott, C. R., Foiles, S. M. & Tucker, G. J. 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 ↗
4. Deringer, V. L. & Csányi, G. Machine learning based interatomic potential for amorphous carbon. Phys. Rev. B 95, 094203 (2017).10.1103/PhysRevB.95.094203 ↗
5. Chmiela, S. et al. Machine learning of accurate energy-conserving molecular force fields. Sci. Adv. 3, e1603015 (2017).10.1126/sciadv.1603015 ↗
6. Schütt, K. et al. Schnet: a continuous-filter convolutional neural network for modeling quantum interactions.Adv. Neural Inf. Process. Syst 31, 991–1001 (2017).
7. Deringer, V. L., Pickard, C. J. & Csányi, G. Data-driven learning of total and local energies in elemental boron. Phys. Rev. Lett. 120, 156001 (2018).10.1103/PhysRevLett.120.156001 ↗
8. Bartók, A. P., Kermode, J., Bernstein, N. & Csányi, G. Machine learning a general-purpose interatomic potential for silicon. Phys. Rev. X 8, 041048 (2018).
9. Zhang, L., Han, J., Wang, H., Car, R. & Weinan, E. Deep potential molecular dynamics: a scalable model with the accuracy of quantum mechanics. Phys. Rev. Lett. 120, 143001 (2018).10.1103/PhysRevLett.120.143001 ↗
10. Zhang, L. et al. End-to-end symmetry preserving inter-atomic potential energy model for finite and extended systems. Adv. Neural Inf. Process. Syst 32, 4441–4451 (2018).
11. Smith, J. S. et al. Approaching coupled cluster accuracy with a general-purpose neural network potential through transfer learning. Nat. Commun. 10, 1–8 (2019).10.1038/s41467-018-07882-8 ↗
12. Botu, V., Batra, R., Chapman, J. & Ramprasad, R. Machine learning force fields: construction, validation, and outlook. J. Phys. Chem. C 121, 511–522 (2016).10.1021/acs.jpcc.6b10908 ↗
13. Podryabinkin, E. V. & Shapeev, A. V. Active learning of linearly parametrized interatomic potentials. Comput. Mater. Sci. 140, 171–180 (2017).10.1016/j.commatsci.2017.08.031 ↗
14. Mishra, A. et al. Multiobjective genetic training and uncertainty quantification of reactive force fields. npj Comput. Mater. 4, 42 (2018).10.1038/s41524-018-0098-3 ↗
15. Janet, J. P., Duan, C., Yang, T., Nandy, A. & Kulik, H. A quantitative uncertainty metric controls error in neural network-driven chemical discovery. Chem. Sci. 10, 7913–7922 (2019).10.1039/C9SC02298H ↗
16. Musil, F., Willatt, M. J., Langovoy, M. A. & Ceriotti, M. Fast and accurate uncertainty estimation in chemical machine learning. J. Chem. Theory Comput. 15, 906–915 (2019).10.1021/acs.jctc.8b00959 ↗
17. Zhang, L., Lin, D.-Y., Wang, H., Car, R. & Weinan, E. Active learning of uniformly accurate interatomic potentials for materials simulation. Phys. Rev. Mater. 3, 023804 (2019).10.1103/PhysRevMaterials.3.023804 ↗
18. Podryabinkin, E. V., Tikhonov, E. V., Shapeev, A. V. & Oganov, A. R. Accelerating crystal structure prediction by machine-learning interatomic potentials with active learning. Phys. Rev. B 99, 064114 (2019).10.1103/PhysRevB.99.064114 ↗
19. Behler, J. Atom-centered symmetry functions for constructing high-dimensional neural network potentials. J. Chem. Phys. 134, 074106 (2011).10.1063/1.3553717 ↗
20. Bartók, A. P., Kondor, R. & Csányi, G. On representing chemical environments. Phys. Rev. B 87, 184115 (2013).10.1103/PhysRevB.87.184115 ↗
21. 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 ↗
22. Bartók, A. P. & Csányi, G. Gaussian approximation potentials: a brief tutorial introduction. Int. J. Quant. Chem. 115, 1051–1057 (2015).10.1002/qua.24927 ↗
23. Williams, C. K. I. & Rasmussen, C. E. Gaussian Processes For Machine Learning. Vol. 2. Chapter 2 (MIT Press Cambridge: MA, 2006).
24. Quiñonero-Candela, J. & Rasmussen, C. E. A unifying view of sparse approximate gaussian process regression. J. Mach. Learn. Res. 6, 1939–1959 (2005).
25. Li, Z., Kermode, J. R. & De Vita, A. Molecular dynamics with on-the-fly machine learning of quantum-mechanical forces. Phys. Rev. Lett. 114, 096405 (2015).10.1103/PhysRevLett.114.096405 ↗
26. Stillinger, F. H. & Weber, T. A. Computer simulation of local order in condensed phases of silicon. Phys. Rev. B 31, 5262 (1985).10.1103/PhysRevB.31.5262 ↗
27. Bernstein, N., Csányi, G. & Deringer, V. L. De novo exploration and self-guided learning of potential-energy surfaces. npj Comput. Mater. 5, 1–9 (2019).10.1038/s41524-019-0236-6 ↗
28. Rupp, M. et al. Machine learning estimates of natural product conformational energies. PLoS Comput. Biol. 10, e1003400 (2014).10.1371/journal.pcbi.1003400 ↗
29. Uteva, E., Graham, R. S., Wilkinson, R. D. & Wheatley, R. J. Active learning in gaussian process interpolation of potential energy surfaces. J. Chem. Phys. 149, 174114 (2018).10.1063/1.5051772 ↗
30. Smith, J. S., Nebgen, B., Lubbers, N., Isayev, O. & Roitberg, A. E. Less is more: sampling chemical space with active learning. J. Chem. Phys. 148, 241733 (2018).10.1063/1.5023802 ↗
31. Li, Z. On-the-fly Machine Learning of Quantum Mechanical Forces and Its Potential Applications for Large Scale Molecular Dynamics. Ph.D. thesis, King’s College, London (2014).10.1103/PhysRevLett.114.096405 ↗
32. Shapeev, A. V. Moment tensor potentials: a class of systematically improvable interatomic potentials. Multiscale Model. Simul. 14, 1153–1173 (2016).10.1137/15M1054183 ↗
33. Gubaev, K., Podryabinkin, E. V., Hart, G. L. W. & Shapeev, A. V. Accelerating high-throughput searches for new alloys with active learning of interatomic potentials. Comput. Mater. Sci. 156, 148–156 (2019).10.1016/j.commatsci.2018.09.031 ↗
34. Gubaev, K., Podryabinkin, E. V. & Shapeev, A. V. Machine learning of molecular properties: locality and active learning. J. Chem. Phys. 148, 241727 (2018).10.1063/1.5005095 ↗
35. Jinnouchi, R., Karsai, F. & Kresse, G. On-the-fly machine learning force field generation: application to melting points. Phys. Rev. B 100, 014105 (2019).10.1103/PhysRevB.100.014105 ↗
36. 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 ↗
37. 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 ↗
38. Glielmo, A., Zeni, C. & De Vita, A. Efficient nonparametric n-body force fields from machine learning. Phys. Rev. B 97, 184307 (2018).10.1103/PhysRevB.97.184307 ↗
39. Sheng, H. W., Kramer, M. J., Cadien, A., Fujita, T. & Chen, M. W. Highly optimized embedded-atom-method potentials for fourteen fcc metals. Phys. Rev. B 83, 134118 (2011).10.1103/PhysRevB.83.134118 ↗
40. Stumpf, R. & Scheffler, M. Theory of self-diffusion at and growth of al (111). Phys. Rev. Lett. 72, 254 (1994).10.1103/PhysRevLett.72.254 ↗
41. Stumpf, R. & Scheffler, M. Ab initio calculations of energies and self-diffusion on flat and stepped surfaces of al and their implications on crystal growth. Phys. Rev. B 53, 4958 (1996).10.1103/PhysRevB.53.4958 ↗
42. Larsen, A. H. et al. The atomic simulation environment-a python library for working with atoms. J. Phys. Condens. Matter 29, 273002 (2017).10.1088/1361-648X/aa680e ↗
43. Hull, S. Superionics: crystal structures and conduction processes. Rep. Prog. Phys. 67, 1233 (2004).10.1088/0034-4885/67/7/R05 ↗
44. Wood, B. C. & Marzari, N. Dynamical structure, bonding, and thermodynamics of the superionic sublattice in α - agi. Phys. Rev. Lett. 97, 166401 (2006).10.1103/PhysRevLett.97.166401 ↗
45. Kvist, A. & Tärneberg, R. Self-diffusion of silver ions in the cubic high temperature modification of silver iodide. Z. für Naturforsch. A 25, 257–259 (1970).10.1515/zna-1970-0219 ↗
46. Parrinello, M., Rahman, A. & Vashishta, P. Structural transitions in superionic conductors. Phys. Rev. Lett. 50, 1073 (1983).10.1103/PhysRevLett.50.1073 ↗
47. Madelung, O., Rössler, U., Schulz, M. II-VI and I-VII Compounds; Semimagnetic Compounds, 1–7 (Springer-Verlag, 1999).10.1007/b71137 ↗
48. Gastegger, M., Behler, J. & Marquetand, P. Machine learning molecular dynamics for the simulation of infrared spectra. Chem. Sci. 8, 6924–6935 (2017).10.1039/C7SC02267K ↗
49. Mailoa, J. P. et al. Fast neural network approach for direct covariant forces prediction in complex multi-element extended systems. Nat. Mach. Intell. 1, 471–479 (2019).10.1038/s42256-019-0098-0 ↗
50. Glielmo, A., Sollich, P. & De Vita, A. Accurate interatomic force fields via machine learning with covariant kernels. Phys. Rev. B 95, 214302 (2017).10.1103/PhysRevB.95.214302 ↗
51. Glielmo, A. & Zeni, C. Building nonparametric n-body force fields using gaussian process regression, arXiv preprint arXiv:1905.07626 (2019).10.1007/978-3-030-40245-7_5 ↗
52. Jones, E. et al. SciPy. Open Source Scientific Tools for Python http://www.scipy.org/ (2001).
53. Giannozzi, P. et al. Quantum espresso: a modular and open-source software project for quantum simulations of materials. J. Phys. Condens. matter 21, 395502 (2009).10.1088/0953-8984/21/39/395502 ↗
54. Lam, S. K., Pitrou, A. & Seibert, S. Numba: a llvm-based python jit compiler. In Proc. Second Workshop on the LLVM Compiler Infrastructure in HPC 7 (ACM, 2015).10.1145/2833157.2833162 ↗
55. Li, J. Atomeye: an efficient atomistic configuration viewer. Model. Simul. Mater. Sci. Eng. 11, 173 (2003).10.1088/0965-0393/11/2/305 ↗