Geometry-enhanced pretraining on interatomic potentials

Taoyong Cui, Chenyu Tang, Mao Su, Shufei Zhang, Yuqiang Li, Lei Bai, Yuhan Dong, Xingao Gong, Wanli Ouyang

Main figure for Geometry-enhanced pretraining on interatomic potentials

Abstract

Machine learning interatomic potentials (MLIPs) describe the interactions between atoms in materials and molecules by learning them from a reference database generated by ab initio calculations. MLIPs can accurately and efficiently predict such interactions and have been applied to various fields of physical science. However, high-performance MLIPs rely on a large amount of labelled data, which are costly to obtain by ab initio calculations. Here we propose a geometric structure learning framework that leverages unlabelled configurations to improve the performance of MLIPs. Our framework consists of two stages: first, using classical molecular dynamics simulations to generate unlabelled configurations of the target molecular system; and second, applying geometry-enhanced self-supervised learning techniques, including masking, denoising and contrastive learning, to capture structural information. We evaluate our framework on various benchmarks ranging from small molecule datasets to complex periodic molecular systems with more types of elements. We show that our method significantly improves the accuracy and generalization of MLIPs with only a few additional computational costs and is compatible with different invariant or equivariant graph neural network architectures. Our method enhances MLIPs and advances the simulations of molecular systems. Using machine learning methods to model interatomic potentials enables molecular dynamics simulations with ab initio level accuracy at a relatively low computational cost, but requires a large number of labelled training data obtained through expensive ab initio computations. Cui and colleagues propose a geometric learning framework that leverages self-supervised learning pretraining to enhance existing machine learning based interatomic potential models at a negligible additional computational cost.

Benchmark Results

Tested on 1 dataset 4 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
21
GemNet-T
actual #21 vs paper #75 54 places worse
0.0070
best reported
actual #21 vs paper #75 54 places worse
paper 0.1010
46
SchNet
actual #46 vs paper #105 59 places worse
0.0500
best reported
actual #46 vs paper #105 59 places worse
paper 0.3100
52
SphereNet
actual #52 vs paper #95 43 places worse
0.0520
best reported
actual #52 vs paper #95 43 places worse
paper 0.1550
64
DimeNet++
actual #64 vs paper #98 34 places worse
0.0640
best reported
actual #64 vs paper #98 34 places worse
paper 0.1870
paper 0.1870 Δ at pub 0.1230 Δ today 0.1230
67
GemNet-T-G
0.0740 ±0.0120
This paper
69
DimeNet-G
0.0900 ±0.0230
This paper
70
SphereNet-G
0.0900 ±0.0090
This paper
103
SchNet-G
0.2710 ±0.0230
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)