Genetic algorithms for computational materials discovery accelerated by machine learning
Source abstract
Abstract
Abstract Materials discovery is increasingly being impelled by machine learning methods that rely on pre-existing datasets. Where datasets are lacking, unbiased data generation can be achieved with genetic algorithms. Here a machine learning model is trained on-the-fly as a computationally inexpensive energy predictor before analyzing how to augment convergence in genetic algorithm-based approaches by using the model as a surrogate. This leads to a machine learning accelerated genetic algorithm combining robust qualities of the genetic algorithm with rapid machine learning. The approach is used to search for stable, compositionally variant, geometrically similar nanoparticle alloys to illustrate its capability for accelerated materials discovery, e.g., nanoalloy catalysts. The machine learning accelerated approach, in this case, yields a 50-fold reduction in the number of required energy calculations compared to a traditional “brute force” genetic algorithm. This makes searching through the space of all homotops and compositions of a binary alloy particle in a given structure feasible, using density functional theory calculations.
Source: crossref · Quality: baseline
Research context
OpenAlex topics: Machine Learning in Materials Science · Computational Drug Discovery Methods · X-ray Diffraction in Crystallography
SciVX discovery tags are terminology-based. OpenAlex topics are source-provided classifications.
References (49)
Show source-provided references
1. Holland, J. H. Adaptation in Natural and Artificial Systems (The University of Michigan Press, Ann Arbor, MI, 1975) p. 211.
2. Goldberg, D. E. Genetic Algorithms in Search, Optimization, and Machine Learning (Addison-Wesley, Boston, MA, 1989) p. 412.
3. Cristianini, N. & Shawe-Taylor, J. An Introduction to Support Vector Machines and Other Kernel-based Learning Methods (Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, 2000) p. 189.10.1017/CBO9780511801389 ↗
4. Rasmussen, C. E. & Williams, C. K. I. Gaussian Processes for Machine Learning (MIT Press, Cambridge, MA, 2006) p. 248.10.7551/mitpress/3206.001.0001 ↗
5. Deaven, D. & Ho, K. Molecular geometry optimization with a genetic algorithm. Phys. Rev. Lett. 75, 288–291 (1995).10.1103/PhysRevLett.75.288 ↗
6. Johnston, R. L. Evolving better nanoparticles: genetic algorithms for optimising cluster geometries. Dalton Trans. 22, 4193–4207 (2003).10.1039/b305686d ↗
7. Ferrando, R., Jellinek, J. & Johnston, R. L. Nanoalloys: from theory to applications of alloy clusters and nanoparticles. Chem. Rev. 108, 845–910 (2008).10.1021/cr040090g ↗
8. Paz-Borbón, L. O., Johnston, R. L., Barcaro, G. & Fortunelli, A. Structural motifs, mixing, and segregation effects in 38-atom binary clusters. J. Chem. Phys. 128, 134517 (2008).10.1063/1.2897435 ↗
9. Logsdail, A., Paz-Borbón, L. O. & Johnston, R. L. Structures and stabilities of platinum-gold nanoclusters. J. Comput. Theor. Nanosci. 6, 857–866 (2009).10.1166/jctn.2009.1118 ↗
10. Lysgaard, S., Landis, D. D., Bligaard, T. & Vegge, T. Genetic algorithm procreation operators for alloy nanoparticle catalysts. Top. Catal. 57, 33–39 (2013).10.1007/s11244-013-0160-9 ↗
11. Lysgaard, S., Mýrdal, J. S. G., Hansen, H. A. & Vegge, T. A DFT-based genetic algorithm search for AuCu nanoalloy electrocatalysts for CO2 reduction. Phys. Chem. Chem. Phys. 17, 28270–28276 (2015).10.1039/C5CP00298B ↗
12. Jacobsen, K. W., Norskov, J. K. & Puska, M. J. Interatomic interactions in the effective-medium theory. Phys. Rev. B 35, 7423–7442 (1987).10.1103/PhysRevB.35.7423 ↗
13. Gupta, R. Lattice relaxation at a metal surface. Phys. Rev. B 23, 6265–6270 (1981).10.1103/PhysRevB.23.6265 ↗
14. Sutton, A. P. & Chen, J. Long-range Finnis-Sinclair potentials. Philos. Mag. Lett. 61, 139–146 (1990).10.1080/09500839008206493 ↗
15. Murrell, J. N. & Mottram, R. E. Potential energy functions for atomic solids. Mol. Phys. 69, 571–585 (1990).10.1080/00268979000100411 ↗
16. Heiles, S. & Johnston, R. L. Global optimization of clusters using electronic structure methods. Int. J. Quantum Chem. 113, 2091–2109 (2013).10.1002/qua.24462 ↗
17. Jóhannesson, G. H. et al. Combined electronic structure and evolutionary search approach to materials design. Phys. Rev. Lett. 88, 255506 (2002).10.1103/PhysRevLett.88.255506 ↗
18. Froemming, N. S. & Henkelman, G. Optimizing core-shell nanoparticle catalysts with a genetic algorithm. J. Chem. Phys. 131, 234103 (2009).10.1063/1.3272274 ↗
19. Heiles, S., Logsdail, A. J., Schäfer, R. & Johnston, R. L. Dopant-induced 2D-3D transition in small Au-containing clusters: DFT-global optimisation of 8-atom Au-Ag nanoalloys. Nanoscale 4, 1109–1115 (2012).10.1039/C1NR11053E ↗
20. Davis, J. B. A., Shayeghi, A., Horswell, S. L. & Johnston, R. L. The Birmingham parallel genetic algorithm and its application to the direct DFT global optimisation of IrN (N = 10–20) clusters. Nanoscale 7, 14032–14038 (2015).10.1039/C5NR03774C ↗
21. Vilhelmsen, L. B. & Hammer, B. Systematic study of Au6 to Au12 gold clusters on MgO(100) F centers using density-functional theory. Phys. Rev. Lett. 108, 126101 (2012).10.1103/PhysRevLett.108.126101 ↗
22. Martinez, U., Vilhelmsen, L. B., Kristoffersen, H. H., Stausholm-Møller, J. & Hammer, B. Steps on rutile TiO2 (110): active sites for water and methanol dissociation. Phys. Rev. B 84, 205434 (2011).10.1103/PhysRevB.84.205434 ↗
23. Jennings, P. C. & Johnston, R. L. Structures of small Ti- and V-doped Pt clusters: a GA-DFT study. Comput. Theor. Chem. 1021, 91–100 (2013).10.1016/j.comptc.2013.06.033 ↗
24. Heard, C. J. & Johnston, R. L. A density functional global optimisation study of neutral 8-atom Cu-Ag and Cu-Au clusters. Eur. Phys. J. D 67, 34 (2013).10.1140/epjd/e2012-30601-7 ↗
25. Shayeghi, A., Götz, D. A., Johnston, R. L. & Schäfer, R. Optical absorption spectra and structures of Ag6 + and Ag8 +. Eur. Phys. J. D 69, 152 (2015).10.1140/epjd/e2015-60188-2 ↗
26. Li, X., Liu, J., He, W., Huang, Q. & Yang, H. Influence of the composition of core-shell au-pt nanoparticle electrocatalysts for the oxygen reduction reaction. J. Colloid Interface Sci. 344, 132–136 (2010).10.1016/j.jcis.2009.12.019 ↗
27. Cui, C. et al. Octahedral PtNi nanoparticle catalysts: exceptional oxygen reduction activity by tuning the alloy particle surface composition. Nano Lett. 12, 5885–5889 (2012).10.1021/nl3032795 ↗
28. Ferrando, R. Symmetry breaking and morphological instabilities in core-shell metallic nanoparticles. J. Phys. Condens. Matter 27, 013003 (2015).10.1088/0953-8984/27/1/013003 ↗
29. Echt, O., Sattler, K. & Recknagel, E. Magic numbers for sphere packings: experimental verification in free xenon clusters. Phys. Rev. Lett. 47, 1121–1124 (1981).10.1103/PhysRevLett.47.1121 ↗
30. Aprà, E., Baletto, F., Ferrando, R. & Fortunelli, A. Amorphization mechanism of icosahedral metal nanoclusters. Phys. Rev. Lett. 93, 065502 (2004).10.1103/PhysRevLett.93.065502 ↗
31. Gould, A. L., Rossi, K., Catlow, C. R. A., Baletto, F. & Logsdail, A. J. Controlling structural transitions in AuAg nanoparticles through precise compositional design. J. Phys. Chem. Lett. 7, 4414–4419 (2016).10.1021/acs.jpclett.6b02181 ↗
32. Bochicchio, D., Negro, F. & Ferrando, R. Competition between structural motifs in gold–platinum nanoalloys. Comput. Theor. Chem. 1021, 177–182 (2013).10.1016/j.comptc.2013.07.017 ↗
33. Leppert, L., Albuquerque, R. Q., Foster, A. S. & Kümmel, S. Interplay of electronic structure and atomic mobility in nanoalloys of Au and Pt. J. Phys. Chem. C 117, 17268–17273 (2013).10.1021/jp404341v ↗
34. Yang, Z., Yang, X., Xu, Z. & Liu, S. Structural evolution of Pt–Au nanoalloys during heating process: comparison of random and core-shell orderings. Phys. Chem. Chem. Phys. 11, 6249 (2009).10.1039/b821328c ↗
35. Bartók, A. P., Kondor, R. & Csányi, G. On representing chemical environments. Phys. Rev. B 87, 1–16 (2013).
36. 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 ↗
37. Khorshidi, A. & Peterson, A. A. Amp: a modular approach to machine learning in atomistic simulations. Comput. Phys. Commun. 207, 310–324 (2016).10.1016/j.cpc.2016.05.010 ↗
38. Artrith, N. & Urban, A. An implementation of artificial neural-network potentials for atomistic materials simulations: performance for TiO2. Comput. Mater. Sci. 114, 135–150 (2016).10.1016/j.commatsci.2015.11.047 ↗
39. Schütt, K. T. et al. SchNetPack: a deep learning toolbox for atomistic systems. arXiv https://doi.org/10.1021/acs.jctc.8b00908 (2018).10.1021/acs.jctc.8b00908 ↗
40. Patra, T. K., Meenakshisundaram, V., Hung, J.-H. & Simmons, D. S. Neural-network-biased genetic algorithms for materials design: evolutionary algorithms that learn. ACS Combinatorial Sci. 19, 96–107 (2017).10.1021/acscombsci.6b00136 ↗
41. Kolsbjerg, E. L., Peterson, A. A. & Hammer, B. Neural-network-enhanced evolutionary algorithm applied to supported metal nanoparticles. Phys. Rev. B 97, 195424 (2018).10.1103/PhysRevB.97.195424 ↗
42. Bitzek, E., Koskinen, P., Gähler, F., Moseler, M. & Gumbsch, P. Structural relaxation made simple. Phys. Rev. Lett. 97, 170201 (2006).10.1103/PhysRevLett.97.170201 ↗
43. Enkovaara, J. et al. Electronic structure calculations with GPAW: a real-space implementation of the projector augmented-wave method. J. Phys. Condens. Matter 22, 253202 (2010).10.1088/0953-8984/22/25/253202 ↗
44. Larsen, A. H., Vanin, M., Mortensen, J. J., Thygesen, K. S. & Jacobsen, K. W. Localized atomic basis set in the projector augmented wave method. Phys. Rev. B 80, 195112 (2009).10.1103/PhysRevB.80.195112 ↗
45. Hammer, B., Hansen, L. & Nørskov, J. Improved adsorption energetics within density-functional theory using revised Perdew-Burke-Ernzerhof functionals. Phys. Rev. B 59, 7413–7421 (1999).10.1103/PhysRevB.59.7413 ↗
46. 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 ↗
47. Sareni, B. & Krahenbuhl, L. Fitness sharing and niching methods revisited. IEEE Trans. Evol. Comput. 2, 97–106 (1998).10.1109/4235.735432 ↗
48. Ramakrishnan, R., Dral, P. O., Rupp, M. & von Lilienfeld, O. A. Big data meets quantum chemistry approximations: the Δ-machine learning approach. J. Chem. Theory Comput. 11, 2087–2096 (2015).10.1021/acs.jctc.5b00099 ↗
49. Jørgensen, M. S., Larsen, U. F., Jacobsen, K. W. & Hammer, B. Exploration versus exploitation in global atomistic structure optimization. J. Phys. Chem. A 122, 1504–1509 (2018).10.1021/acs.jpca.8b00160 ↗