Papers
Topics
Authors
Recent
Gemini 2.5 Flash
Gemini 2.5 Flash
169 tokens/sec
GPT-4o
7 tokens/sec
Gemini 2.5 Pro Pro
45 tokens/sec
o3 Pro
4 tokens/sec
GPT-4.1 Pro
38 tokens/sec
DeepSeek R1 via Azure Pro
28 tokens/sec
2000 character limit reached

Stability-Aware Training of Machine Learning Force Fields with Differentiable Boltzmann Estimators (2402.13984v2)

Published 21 Feb 2024 in cs.LG, cond-mat.dis-nn, cond-mat.mtrl-sci, physics.chem-ph, and physics.comp-ph

Abstract: Machine learning force fields (MLFFs) are an attractive alternative to ab-initio methods for molecular dynamics (MD) simulations. However, they can produce unstable simulations, limiting their ability to model phenomena occurring over longer timescales and compromising the quality of estimated observables. To address these challenges, we present Stability-Aware Boltzmann Estimator (StABlE) Training, a multi-modal training procedure which leverages joint supervision from reference quantum-mechanical calculations and system observables. StABlE Training iteratively runs many MD simulations in parallel to seek out unstable regions, and corrects the instabilities via supervision with a reference observable. We achieve efficient end-to-end automatic differentiation through MD simulations using our Boltzmann Estimator, a generalization of implicit differentiation techniques to a broader class of stochastic algorithms. Unlike existing techniques based on active learning, our approach requires no additional ab-initio energy and forces calculations to correct instabilities. We demonstrate our methodology across organic molecules, tetrapeptides, and condensed phase systems, using three modern MLFF architectures. StABlE-trained models achieve significant improvements in simulation stability, data efficiency, and agreement with reference observables. By incorporating observables into the training process alongside first-principles calculations, StABlE Training can be viewed as a general semi-empirical framework applicable across MLFF architectures and systems. This makes it a powerful tool for training stable and accurate MLFFs, particularly in the absence of large reference datasets.

Definition Search Book Streamline Icon: https://streamlinehq.com
References (74)
  1. “OptNet: Differentiable optimization as a layer in neural networks” In Proceedings of the International Conference on Machine Learning (ICML), 2017, pp. 136–145
  2. “Gaussian approximation potentials: The accuracy of quantum mechanics, without the electrons” In Phys. Rev. Lett. 104, 2010, pp. 136403
  3. “A foundation model for atomistic materials chemistry”, 2023 arXiv:2401.00096 [physics.chem-ph]
  4. “MACE: Higher Order Equivariant Message Passing Neural Networks for Fast and Accurate Force Fields” In Neural Information Processing Systems (NeurIPS), 2022
  5. “E(3)-equivariant graph neural networks for data-efficient and accurate interatomic potentials” In Nature Communications 13.1 Springer ScienceBusiness Media LLC, 2022 DOI: 10.1038/s41467-022-29939-5
  6. J. Behler “Neural network potential-energy surfaces in chemistry: A tool for large-scale simulations” In Phys. Chem. Chem. Phys. 13, 2011, pp. 17930–17955
  7. “Generalized Neural-Network Representation of High-Dimensional Potential-Energy Surfaces” In Phys. Rev. Lett. 98 American Physical Society, 2007, pp. 146401 DOI: 10.1103/PhysRevLett.98.146401
  8. “EGraFFBench: Evaluation of Equivariant Graph Neural Network Force Fields for Atomistic Simulations”, 2023 arXiv:2310.02428 [cs.LG]
  9. “Efficient and Modular Implicit Differentiation” In Neural Information Processing Systems (NeurIPS), 2022 Google Research
  10. Peter G. Bolhuis, Z.Faidon Brotzakis and Bettina G. Keller “Optimizing molecular potential models by imposing kinetic constraints with path reweighting” In J. Chem. Phys. 159, 2023, pp. 074102 DOI: 10.1063/5.0151166
  11. “On the Quantum Theory of Molecules” In German In Annalen der Physik 389.20, 1927, pp. 457–484 DOI: 10.1002/andp.19273892002
  12. “Unified Approach for Molecular Dynamics and Density-Functional Theory” Published 25 November 1985 In Phys. Rev. Lett. 55 American Physical Society, 1985, pp. 2471 DOI: 10.1103/PhysRevLett.55.2471
  13. Scott P. Carmichael and M.Scott Shell “A New Multiscale Algorithm and Its Application to Coarse-Grained Peptide Models for Self-Assembly” In J. Phys. Chem. B 116.29 American Chemical Society, 2012, pp. 8383–8393 DOI: 10.1021/jp2114994
  14. “Navigating protein landscapes with a machine-learned transferable coarse-grained model”, 2023 arXiv:2310.18278 [q-bio.BM]
  15. “A universal graph deep learning interatomic potential for the periodic table” In Nat Comput Sci 2, 2022, pp. 718–728 DOI: 10.1038/s43588-022-00349-3
  16. “Ab initio thermodynamics of liquid and solid water” Edited by Pablo G. Debenedetti, Princeton University, Princeton, NJ, approved December 3, 2018 (received for review September 4, 2018) In Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. U.S.A. 116.4, 2019, pp. 1110–1115 DOI: 10.1073/pnas.1815117116
  17. “Accurate global machine learning force fields for molecules with hundreds of atoms”, 2022 arXiv:2209.14865 [physics.chem-ph]
  18. “Machine learning of accurate energy-conserving molecular force fields” In Science Advances 3.5, 2017 DOI: 10.1126/sciadv.1603015
  19. “CHGNet as a pretrained universal neural network potential for charge-informed atomistic modelling” In Nature Machine Intelligence 5.9 Nature Publishing Group UK London, 2023, pp. 1031–1041
  20. “Prediction Errors of Molecular Machine Learning Models Lower than Hybrid DFT Error” Epub 2017 Oct 10 In J Chem Theory Comput 13.11, 2017, pp. 5255–5264 DOI: 10.1021/acs.jctc.7b00577
  21. “Understanding Molecular Simulation: From Algorithms to Applications” Academic Press, 2001
  22. Richard A. Friesner “Ab initio quantum chemistry: Methodology and applications” In Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences 102.19, 2005, pp. 6648–6653 DOI: 10.1073/pnas.0408036102
  23. “Forces are not Enough: Benchmark and Critical Evaluation for Machine Learning Force Fields with Molecular Simulations”, 2022 arXiv:2210.07237 [physics.comp-ph]
  24. Johannes Gasteiger, Florian Becker and Stephan Günnemann In Conference on Neural Information Processing Systems (NeurIPS), 2021
  25. Johannes Gasteiger, Janek Groß and Stephan Günnemann “Directional message passing for molecular graphs” In 8th International Conference on Learning Representations, ICLR, 2020
  26. “GemNet-OC: Developing Graph Neural Networks for Large and Diverse Molecular Simulation Datasets”, 2022 arXiv:2204.02782 [cs.LG]
  27. “e3nn: Euclidean Neural Networks”, 2022 arXiv:2207.09453 [cs.LG]
  28. “On differentiating parameterized argmin and argmax problems with application to bi-level optimization” In arXiv preprint arXiv:1607.05447, 2016
  29. “ForceNet: A Graph Neural Network for Large-Scale Quantum Calculations”, 2021 arXiv:2103.01436 [cs.LG]
  30. “Learning Protein Structure with a Differentiable Simulator” In International Conference on Learning Representations, ICLR, 2019
  31. R.O. Jones “Density functional theory: Its origins, rise to prominence, and future” In Rev. Mod. Phys. 87 American Physical Society, 2015, pp. 897–923 DOI: 10.1103/RevModPhys.87.897
  32. “Efficient interatomic descriptors for accurate machine learning force fields of extended molecules” Erratum in: Nat Commun. 2023 Jul 11;14(1):4116. PMID: 37322039; PMCID: PMC10272221. In Nat Commun 14.1, 2023, pp. 3562 DOI: 10.1038/s41467-023-39214-w
  33. Thomas N. Kipf and Max Welling “Semi-Supervised Classification with Graph Convolutional Networks”, 2017 arXiv:1609.02907 [cs.LG]
  34. “Rescuing off-equilibrium simulation data through dynamic experimental data with dynAMMo” © 2023 The Author(s) In Mach. Learn.: Sci. Technol. 4.4 IOP Publishing Ltd, 2023, pp. 045050 DOI: 10.1088/2632-2153/ac7b4f
  35. “Linear Atomic Cluster Expansion Force Fields for Organic Molecules: Beyond RMSE” PMID: 34735161 In Journal of Chemical Theory and Computation 17.12, 2021, pp. 7696–7711 DOI: 10.1021/acs.jctc.1c00647
  36. “MACE-OFF23: Transferable Machine Learning Force Fields for Organic Molecules”, 2023 arXiv:2312.15211 [physics.chem-ph]
  37. “Scaling the Leading Accuracy of Deep Equivariant Models to Biomolecular Simulations of Realistic Size” In Proceedings of the International Conference for High Performance Computing, Networking, Storage and Analysis, SC ’23 Denver, CO, USA: Association for Computing Machinery, 2023 DOI: 10.1145/3581784.3627041
  38. “Learning continuous models for continuous physics” In Communications Physics 6.1 Nature Publishing Group UK London, 2023, pp. 319
  39. H.G. Kümmel “A biography of the coupled cluster method” In Recent Progress in Many-Body Theories Singapore: World Scientific Publishing, 2002, pp. 334–348
  40. “The atomic simulation environment — a python library for working with atoms” In Journal of Physics: Condensed Matter, 2017 DOI: 10.1088/1361-648X/aa680e
  41. “Searching Configurations in Uncertainty Space: Active Learning of High-Dimensional Neural Network Reactive Potentials” In J. Chem. Theory Comput. 17.5, 2021, pp. 2691–2701 DOI: 10.1021/acs.jctc.0c01193
  42. “Spherical Message Passing for 3D Molecular Graphs” In International Conference on Learning Representations (ICLR), 2022
  43. M. Majewski, A. Pérez and P. Thölke “Machine learning coarse-grained potentials of protein thermodynamics” In Nat Commun 14 Nature Publishing Group, 2023, pp. 5739 DOI: 10.1038/s41467-023-41343-1
  44. “Nuclear quantum effects enter the mainstream” In Nat Rev Chem 2, 2018, pp. 0109 DOI: 10.1038/s41570-017-0109
  45. A. Merchant, S. Batzner and S.S. Schoenholz “Scaling deep learning for materials discovery” In Nature 624 Nature Publishing Group, 2023, pp. 80–85 DOI: 10.1038/s41586-023-06735-9
  46. Joe D. Morrow, John L.A. Gardner and Volker L. Deringer “How to validate machine-learned interatomic potentials” In J. Chem. Phys. 158, 2023, pp. 121501
  47. “Learning Local Equivariant Representations for Large-Scale Atomistic Dynamics”, 2022 arXiv:2204.05249 [physics.comp-ph]
  48. Carles Navarro, Maciej Majewski and Gianni De Fabritiis “Top-Down Machine Learning of Coarse-Grained Protein Force Fields” In J. Chem. Theory Comput., 2023
  49. Geoffrey Négiar, Michael W. Mahoney and Aditi Krishnapriyan “Learning differentiable solvers for systems with hard constraints” In The Eleventh International Conference on Learning Representations, 2023
  50. W.G. Noid “Perspective: coarse-grained models for biomolecular systems” In J. Chem. Phys. 139 American Institute of Physics, 2013, pp. 090901
  51. John P. Perdew, Kieron Burke and Matthias Ernzerhof “Generalized Gradient Approximation Made Simple” In Phys. Rev. Lett. 77 American Physical Society, 1996, pp. 3865–3868 DOI: 10.1103/PhysRevLett.77.3865
  52. Z Raza “Proton ordering in cubic ice and hexagonal ice; a potential new ice phase–XIc” In Phys. Chem. Chem. Phys. 13, 2011, pp. 19788–19795 DOI: 10.1039/c1cp22167a
  53. “TorchOpt: An Efficient Library for Differentiable Optimization”, 2022 arXiv:2211.06934 [cs.MS]
  54. “Accurate machine learning force fields via experimental and simulation data fusion”, 2023 arXiv:2308.09142 [physics.chem-ph]
  55. “Fast and accurate modeling of molecular atomization energies with machine learning” In Phys. Rev. Lett. 108, 2012, pp. 058301
  56. “The Graph Neural Network Model” In IEEE Transactions on Neural Networks 20.1, 2009, pp. 61–80 DOI: 10.1109/TNN.2008.2005605
  57. “Learned Force Fields Are Ready For Ground State Catalyst Discovery”, 2022 arXiv:2209.12466 [cond-mat.mtrl-sci]
  58. “SchNet – A deep learning architecture for molecules and materials” In J. Chem. Phys. 148.24, 2018, pp. 241722 DOI: 10.1063/1.5019779
  59. Kristof T. Schütt, Oliver T. Unke and Michael Gastegger “Equivariant message passing for the prediction of tensorial properties and molecular spectra” In International Conference on Machine Learning (ICML), 2021
  60. “From Molecules to Materials: Pre-training Large Generalizable Models for Atomic Property Prediction”, 2023 arXiv:2310.16802 [cs.LG]
  61. “Differentiable Simulations for Enhanced Sampling of Rare Events”, 2023 arXiv:2301.03480 [physics.chem-ph]
  62. “Less is more: Sampling chemical space with active learning” In J. Chem. Phys. 148, 2018, pp. 241733 DOI: 10.1063/1.5023802
  63. “How robust are modern graph neural network potentials in long and hot molecular dynamics simulations?” In Machine Learning: Science and Technology 3.4 IOP Publishing, 2022, pp. 045010 DOI: 10.1088/2632-2153/ac9955
  64. S. Takamoto, C. Shinagawa and D. Motoki “Towards universal neural network potential for material discovery applicable to arbitrary combination of 45 elements” In Nat Commun 13, 2022, pp. 2991 DOI: 10.1038/s41467-022-30687-9
  65. “Learning neural network potentials from experimental data via Differentiable Trajectory Reweighting” In Nature Communications 12, 2021, pp. 6884 DOI: 10.1038/s41467-021-27241-4
  66. “Accurate Molecular Van Der Waals Interactions from Ground-State Electron Density and Free-Atom Reference Data” In Phys. Rev. Lett. 102 American Physical Society, 2009, pp. 073005 DOI: 10.1103/PhysRevLett.102.073005
  67. “Accurate and Efficient Method for Many-Body van der Waals Interactions” In Phys. Rev. Lett. 108 American Physical Society, 2012, pp. 236402 DOI: 10.1103/PhysRevLett.108.236402
  68. J. Vandermause, S.B. Torrisi and S. Batzner “On-the-fly active learning of interpretable Bayesian force fields for atomistic rare events” In npj Comput Mater 6, 2020, pp. 20 DOI: 10.1038/s41524-020-0283-z
  69. Joshua A. Vita and Daniel Schwalbe-Koda “Data efficiency and extrapolation trends in neural network interatomic potentials” In Mach. Learn.: Sci. Technol. 4 IOP Publishing, 2023, pp. 035031
  70. Wujie Wang, Simon Axelrod and Rafael Gómez-Bombarelli “Differentiable Molecular Simulations for Control and Learning”, 2020 arXiv:2003.00868 [physics.comp-ph]
  71. “Learning pair potentials using differentiable simulations” In The Journal of Chemical Physics 158.4 AIP Publishing, 2023, pp. 044113 DOI: 10.1063/5.0126475
  72. “Improving machine learning force fields for molecular dynamics simulations with fine-grained force metrics” In J. Chem. Phys. 159, 2023, pp. 035101 DOI: 10.1063/5.0147023
  73. Yujie Wu, Harald L. Tepper and Gregory A. Voth “Flexible simple point-charge water model with improved liquid-state properties” In The Journal of Chemical Physics 124.2, 2006, pp. 024503 DOI: 10.1063/1.2136877
  74. Robert W. Zwanzig “High-Temperature Equation of State by a Perturbation Method. I. Nonpolar Gases” In J. Chem. Phys. 22, 1954, pp. 1420–1426
Citations (1)

Summary

  • The paper introduces StABlE Training, a novel dual-modal approach that integrates quantum data with system observables to improve NNIP stability.
  • The paper demonstrates that iterative simulation and learning phases effectively optimize NNIPs, achieving high accuracy with smaller reference datasets.
  • The paper validates the method on diverse systems, showing significant improvements in capturing long-term molecular dynamics and structural observables.

Stability-Aware Training Enhances the Robustness of Neural Network Interatomic Potentials

Introduction to StABlE Training

Neural network interatomic potentials (NNIPs) have emerged as powerful tools for molecular dynamics (MD) simulations, offering a cost-effective alternative to ab-initio methods. Despite their advantages, NNIPs often struggle with simulation stability, particularly over extended time periods, which restricts their utility in capturing long-term physical phenomena. Addressing this critical issue, the Stability-Aware Boltzmann Estimator (StABlE) Training presents a novel training approach that significantly enhances the stability and accuracy of NNIPs by incorporating system observables alongside conventional supervised learning from quantum mechanical data.

Methodological Advancements

StABlE Training introduces a dual-modal training paradigm that converges on stable and accurate NNIPs by iteratively optimizing both quantum-mechanical energy and forces, as well as macroscopic system observables. This approach leverages the Boltzmann Estimator for the gradient-based optimization of NNIPs towards given observables, enabling efficient computation of gradients while detecting global and localized instabilities.

The methodology comprises two main phases: simulation and learning. The simulation phase aims to explore the phase space to identify unstable regions. Upon encountering instabilities, the process transitions to the learning phase, where the NNIP is refined to mitigate the instabilities by aligning with reference system observables. This cycle repeats, driving the NNIP towards greater stability while maintaining fidelity to quantum-mechanical reference data.

Empirical Validation

StABlE Training was validated on diverse systems including organic molecules, tetrapeptides, and condensed-phase systems, employing three modern NNIP architectures. Across these systems, StABlE-trained models demonstrated significant improvements in simulation stability, accurately capturing structural and dynamic observables. Notably, in some instances, StABlE-trained models surpassed the performance of models trained on datasets up to 50 times larger. This underscores the efficiency and effectiveness of the StABlE Training approach in enhancing NNIP stability and accuracy without the need for extensive reference datasets.

Implications and Future Directions

The development of StABlE Training marks a significant advancement in the training of NNIPs, offering a robust framework for producing stable and accurate MD simulations. This method holds considerable promise for extending the applicability of NNIPs to modeling complex phenomena over long timescales, which has been a longstanding challenge in the field.

Looking ahead, there are several exciting avenues for further research. One potential direction involves integrating StABlE Training with experimental observables, offering a pathway to even more generalizable and robust potentials. Additionally, exploring the incorporation of dynamical observables into the training process could further constrain the learning problem, potentially leading to even greater improvements in NNIP performance.

Conclusion

StABlE Training represents a significant step forward in the quest for stable and accurate NNIPs. By adeptly integrating system observables into the training process, this approach opens new horizons for the application of NNIPs across a wider array of complex simulation tasks. As the field of generative AI and LLMs continues to evolve, innovations like StABlE Training will undoubtedly play a pivotal role in unlocking new scientific insights and advancing our understanding of the molecular world.

The remarkable improvements in NNIP stability and accuracy brought forth by StABlE Training not only underscore the potential of integrating multimodal learning approaches but also set a new standard for future research in the development of robust and reliable NNIPs.

Github Logo Streamline Icon: https://streamlinehq.com