ICLR 2023

Spatial Attention Kinetic Network with E(n)-Equivariance

Yuanqing Wang, J. Chodera

Main figure for Spatial Attention Kinetic Network with E(n)-Equivariance

Abstract

Neural networks that are equivariant to rotations, translations, reflections, and permutations on $n$-dimensional geometric space have shown promise in physical modeling---from modeling potential energy surfaces to forecasting the time evolution of dynamical systems. Current state-of-the-art methods employ spherical harmonics to encode higher-order interactions among particles, which are computationally expensive. In this paper, we propose a simple alternative functional form that uses neurally parametrized linear combinations of edge vectors to achieve equivariance while still universally approximating node environments. Incorporating this insight, we design spatial attention kinetic networks with E(n)-equivariance, or SAKE, which are competitive in many-body system modeling tasks while being significantly faster.

Benchmark Results

Tested on 1 dataset 5 baseline values reported too low

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

Quantum Chemistry

#ModelMAE ↓Paper
1
QHNet
0.0000
2
QHNetV2
0.0000
3
PhiSNet
0.0000
7
NequIP
actual #7 vs paper #120 113 places worse
0.0009
best reported
actual #7 vs paper #120 113 places worse
paper 5.3000
22
PaiNN
actual #22 vs paper #121 99 places worse
0.0100
best reported
actual #22 vs paper #121 99 places worse
paper 6.9000
46
SchNet
actual #46 vs paper #124 78 places worse
0.0500
best reported
actual #46 vs paper #124 78 places worse
paper 16.0000
61
sGDML
actual #61 vs paper #121 60 places worse
0.0600
best reported
actual #61 vs paper #121 60 places worse
paper 8.2000
paper 8.2000 Δ at pub 8.1400
64
DimeNet++
actual #64 vs paper #121 57 places worse
0.0640
best reported
actual #64 vs paper #121 57 places worse
paper 8.8000
paper 8.8000 Δ at pub 8.7360 Δ today 8.7360
118
SAKE
2.1000
This paper
123
GemNet (T/Q)
9.4000
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)