Molecule Graph Networks with Many-body Equivariant Interactions

Zetian Mao, Jiawen Li, Chen Liang, Diptesh Das, Masato Sumita, Koji Tsuda

Main figure for Molecule Graph Networks with Many-body Equivariant Interactions

Abstract

Message passing neural networks have demonstrated significant efficacy in predicting molecular interactions. Introducing equivariant vectorial representations augments expressivity by capturing geometric data symmetries, thereby improving model accuracy. However, two-body bond vectors in opposition may cancel each other out during message passing, leading to the loss of directional information on their shared node. In this study, we develop Equivariant N-body Interaction Networks (ENINet) that explicitly integrates $l = 1$ equivariant many-body interactions to enhance directional symmetric information in the message passing scheme. We provided a mathematical analysis demonstrating the necessity of incorporating many-body equivariant interactions and generalized the formulation to $N$-body interactions. Experiments indicate that integrating many-body equivariant representations enhances prediction accuracy across diverse scalar and tensorial quantum chemical properties.

Proposed method: ENINet

Benchmark Results

Tested on 1 dataset 3 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
22
PaiNN
actual #22 vs paper #67 45 places worse
0.0100
best reported
actual #22 vs paper #67 45 places worse
paper 0.0770
41
ENINet
0.0430
This paper
46
SchNet
actual #46 vs paper #67 21 places worse
0.0500
best reported
actual #46 vs paper #67 21 places worse
paper 0.0800
54
ET
0.0520
This paper
63
NewtonNet
actual #63 vs paper #67 4 places worse
0.0610
best reported
actual #63 vs paper #67 4 places worse
paper 0.0780
64
DimeNet++
0.0640
This paper
74
NequIP
0.0970
This paper
SOTA performance (not significantly different from the best) Proposed method (this paper) Baseline / comparison (this paper) Global context (other papers) Best at pub — reported result worse than the best known when published (best reported in green)