Learning 3D Anisotropic Noise Distributions Improves Molecular Force Field Modeling

Xixian Liu, Rui Jiao, Zhiyuan Liu, Yurou Liu, Yang Liu, Ziheng Lu, Wenbing Huang, Yang Zhang, Yixin Cao

Main figure for Learning 3D Anisotropic Noise Distributions Improves Molecular Force Field Modeling

Abstract

Coordinate denoising has emerged as a promising method for 3D molecular pre-training due to its theoretical connection to learning a molecular force field. However, existing denoising methods rely on oversimplified molecular dynamics that assume atomic motions to be isotropic and homoscedastic. To address these limitations, we propose a novel denoising framework AniDS: sotropic Variational Autoencoder for 3D Molecular enoi ing. AniDS introduces a structure-aware anisotropic noise generator that can produce atom-specific, full covariance matrices for Gaussian noise distributions to better reflect directional and structural variability in molecular systems. These covariances are derived from pairwise atomic interactions as anisotropic corrections to an isotropic base. Our design ensures that the resulting covariance matrices are symmetric, positive semi-definite, and SO(3)-equivariant, while providing greater capacity to model complex molecular dynamics. Extensive experiments show that AniDS outperforms prior isotropic and homoscedastic denoising models and other leading methods on the MD17 and OC22 benchmarks, achieving average relative improvements of 8.9\

Proposed method: AniDS

Benchmark Results

Tested on 1 dataset 6 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
32
AniDS
0.0360
This paper
33
DeNS (Lmax=3)
0.0370
This paper
35
TorchMD-Net
actual #35 vs paper #62 27 places worse
0.0390
best reported
actual #35 vs paper #62 27 places worse
paper 0.0610
paper 0.0610 Δ at pub 0.0220
38
NequIP (Lmax=3)
0.0390
This paper
42
Frad
actual #42 vs paper #58 16 places worse
0.0431
best reported
actual #42 vs paper #58 16 places worse
paper 0.0530
paper 0.0530 Δ at pub 0.0099
45
SliDe
actual #45 vs paper #45
0.0480
actual #45 vs paper #45
paper 0.0480
paper 0.0480 Δ at pub 0.0003
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
58
Coord
actual #58 vs paper #58
0.0529
best reported
actual #58 vs paper #58
paper 0.0530
paper 0.0530 Δ at pub 0.0001
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
86
SE(3)-DDM
0.1220
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) Best at pub — reported value improved over the best known when published