The design space of E(3)-equivariant atom-centred interatomic potentials

Ilyes Batatia, Simon Batzner, D\'avid P\'eter Kov\'acs, Albert Musaelian, Gregor N.\ C.\ Simm, Ralf Drautz, Christoph Ortner, Boris Kozinsky, G\'abor Cs\'anyi

Main figure for The design space of E(3)-equivariant atom-centred interatomic potentials

Abstract

Molecular dynamics simulation is an important tool in computational materials science and chemistry, and in the past decade it has been revolutionized by machine learning. This rapid progress in machine learning interatomic potentials has produced a number of new architectures in just the past few years. Particularly notable among these are the atomic cluster expansion, which unified many of the earlier ideas around atom-density-based descriptors, and Neural Equivariant Interatomic Potentials (NequIP), a message-passing neural network with equivariant features that exhibited state-of-the-art accuracy at the time. Here we construct a mathematical framework that unifies these models: atomic cluster expansion is extended and recast as one layer of a multi-layer architecture, while the linearized version of NequIP is understood as a particular sparsification of a much larger polynomial model. Our framework also provides a practical tool for systematically probing different choices in this unified design space. An ablation study of NequIP, via a set of experiments looking at in- and out-of-domain accuracy and smooth extrapolation very far from the training data, sheds some light on which design choices are critical to achieving high accuracy. A much-simplified version of NequIP, which we call BOTnet (for body-ordered tensor network), has an interpretable architecture and maintains its accuracy on benchmark datasets. Batatia and colleagues introduce a computational framework that combines message-passing networks with the atomic cluster expansion architecture and incorporates a many-body description of the geometry of molecular structures. The resulting models are interpretable and accurate.

Proposed method: BOTNet

Benchmark Results

Tested on 1 dataset 1 baseline value reported too low

Tables show presented results in global context (best 3 papers + GCN + MLP).

Quantum Chemistry

MD17

Global leaderboard →

Default metric is MAE. The paper reports 2 values on MAE , 12 values on E and 12 values on F .

#ModelMAE ↓ defaultE ↓F ↓Paper
1
QHNet
1.04e-05
——
2
QHNetV2
1.04e-05
——
3
PhiSNet
1.76e-05
——
5
BOTNet
0.0007
best reported
2.3000
8.5000
E 2.3000
F 8.5000
paper 0.0300
7
NequIP
0.0009
best reported
2.3000
8.2000
122
Linear ACE
—
6.1000
17.9000
E 6.1000
F 17.9000
This paper
97
FCHL
—
6.2000
20.9000
E 6.2000
F 20.9000
This paper
22
PaiNN
—
6.9000
16.1000
E 6.9000
F 16.1000
This paper
61
sGDML
—
7.2000
31.8000
E 7.2000
F 31.8000
This paper
63
NewtonNet
—
7.3000
15.1000
E 7.3000
F 15.1000
This paper
64
DimeNet++
—
8.8000
21.6000
E 8.8000
F 21.6000
This paper
46
SchNet
—
16.0000
58.5000
E 16.0000
F 58.5000
This paper
125
GMsNN
—
16.5000
29.9000
E 16.5000
F 29.9000
This paper
125
ANI
—
16.6000
40.6000
E 16.6000
F 40.6000
This paper
126
GAP
—
17.7000
44.9000
E 17.7000
F 44.9000
This paper
SOTA performance (not significantly different from the best) Baseline / comparison (this paper) Global context (other papers) Best at pub — reported result worse than the best known when published (best reported in green) Best today — OK at publication; today's leaderboard best is elsewhere