Papers
Topics
Authors
Recent
Gemini 2.5 Flash
Gemini 2.5 Flash
139 tokens/sec
GPT-4o
7 tokens/sec
Gemini 2.5 Pro Pro
46 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

Generative artificial intelligence for computational chemistry: a roadmap to predicting emergent phenomena (2409.03118v1)

Published 4 Sep 2024 in cond-mat.stat-mech, cond-mat.dis-nn, cs.LG, and physics.chem-ph

Abstract: The recent surge in Generative AI has introduced exciting possibilities for computational chemistry. Generative AI methods have made significant progress in sampling molecular structures across chemical species, developing force fields, and speeding up simulations. This Perspective offers a structured overview, beginning with the fundamental theoretical concepts in both Generative AI and computational chemistry. It then covers widely used Generative AI methods, including autoencoders, generative adversarial networks, reinforcement learning, flow models and LLMs, and highlights their selected applications in diverse areas including force field development, and protein/RNA structure prediction. A key focus is on the challenges these methods face before they become truly predictive, particularly in predicting emergent chemical phenomena. We believe that the ultimate goal of a simulation method or theory is to predict phenomena not seen before, and that Generative AI should be subject to these same standards before it is deemed useful for chemistry. We suggest that to overcome these challenges, future AI models need to integrate core chemical principles, especially from statistical mechanics.

Definition Search Book Streamline Icon: https://streamlinehq.com
References (128)
  1. \JournalTitleJournal of the American Chemical Society 145, 8736–8750 (2023).
  2. \JournalTitleNature Machine Intelligence pp. 1–16 (2024).
  3. GM Rotskoff, Sampling thermodynamic ensembles of molecular systems with generative neural networks: Will integrating physics-based models close the generalization gap? \JournalTitleCurrent Opinion in Solid State and Materials Science 30, 101158 (2024).
  4. \JournalTitleAnnual Review of Physical Chemistry 75 (2024).
  5. PW Anderson, More is different: Broken symmetry and the nature of the hierarchical structure of science. \JournalTitleScience 177, 393–396 (1972).
  6. \JournalTitleAdvances in Neural Information Processing Systems 36 (2024).
  7. \JournalTitleJournal of Statistical Mechanics: Theory and Experiment 2023, 093402 (2023).
  8. (Elsevier), (2023).
  9. AD White, Deep learning for molecules and materials. \JournalTitleLiving Journal of Computational Molecular Science 3, 1499 (2021).
  10. \JournalTitleCurrent opinion in structural biology 49, 129–138 (2018).
  11. \JournalTitleProceedings of the National Academy of Sciences 102, 6732–6737 (2005).
  12. \JournalTitleJournal of Chemical Information and Modeling 63, 4012–4029 (2023).
  13. (PMLR), pp. 1214–1223 (2018).
  14. \JournalTitleICLR (Poster) 3 (2017).
  15. \JournalTitleJournal of Chemical Theory and Computation 20, 3503–3513 (2024).
  16. \JournalTitleThe Journal of Physical Chemistry B 128, 755–767 (2024).
  17. \JournalTitleThe Journal of Chemical Physics 154 (2021).
  18. \JournalTitleThe Journal of Physical Chemistry B 126, 3950–3960 (2022).
  19. \JournalTitleJournal of Chemical Theory and Computation 19, 9093–9101 (2023).
  20. (Curran Associates, Inc.), Vol. 27, (2014).
  21. \JournalTitleArXiv abs/1411.1784 (2014).
  22. (PMLR), Vol. 70, pp. 214–223 (2017).
  23. (Curran Associates, Inc.), Vol. 31, (2018).
  24. \JournalTitleNature Communications 14, 774 (2023).
  25. \JournalTitleChem. Sci. 11, 9459–9467 (2020).
  26. \JournalTitleNature Communications 9, 5 (2018).
  27. \JournalTitleIEEE Transactions on Knowledge and Data Engineering 35, 3313–3332 (2023).
  28. \JournalTitle2020 International Joint Conference on Neural Networks (IJCNN) pp. 1–10 (2020).
  29. (2021).
  30. \JournalTitleJournal of chemical information and modeling 60, 5918–5922 (2020).
  31. \JournalTitleNature biotechnology 37, 1038–1040 (2019).
  32. \JournalTitlePhysical Chemistry Chemical Physics 23, 6888–6895 (2021).
  33. \JournalTitleThe Journal of Chemical Physics 155 (2021).
  34. \JournalTitleJournal of Chemical Theory and Computation 18, 5422–5434 (2022).
  35. (Chicago, IL, USA), Vol. 8, pp. 1433–1438 (2008).
  36. \JournalTitleNature Machine Intelligence pp. 1–11 (2024).
  37. \JournalTitleAnnual review of physical chemistry 71, 213–238 (2020).
  38. \JournalTitleThe Journal of Machine Learning Research 24, 10006–10060 (2023).
  39. (PMLR), pp. 2256–2265 (2015).
  40. \JournalTitleEurophysics Letters (EPL) 19, 451?458 (1992).
  41. RM Neal, Annealed importace sampling. \JournalTitleStatistics and Computing 11, 125?139 (2001).
  42. \JournalTitleAdvances in neural information processing systems 32 (2019).
  43. \JournalTitleAdvances in Neural Information Processing Systems 33, 5933–5944 (2020).
  44. \JournalTitleAdvances in neural information processing systems 33, 6840–6851 (2020).
  45. \JournalTitlearXiv preprint arXiv:2011.13456 (2020).
  46. BD Anderson, Reverse-time diffusion equation models. \JournalTitleStochastic Processes and their Applications 12, 313?326 (1982).
  47. \JournalTitleJournal of Chemical Theory and Computation 18, 5759?5791 (2022).
  48. \JournalTitlearXiv preprint arXiv:2210.02747 (2022).
  49. \JournalTitlearXiv preprint arXiv:2303.08797 (2023).
  50. \JournalTitleNeural computation 9, 1735–1780 (1997).
  51. A Vaswani, Attention is all you need. \JournalTitlearXiv preprint arXiv:1706.03762 (2017).
  52. pp. 610–623 (2021).
  53. \JournalTitleNature Communications 13, 7231 (2022).
  54. \JournalTitleNature Chemistry 12, 891–897 (2020).
  55. \JournalTitleScience 385, eadn0137 (2024).
  56. \JournalTitleWIREs Computational Molecular Science 7, e1290 (2017).
  57. P Tiwary, Modeling prebiotic chemistries with quantum accuracy at classical costs. \JournalTitleProceedings of the National Academy of Sciences 121, e2408742121 (2024).
  58. \JournalTitleNature communications 14, 5739 (2023).
  59. \JournalTitleAnnual review of physical chemistry 71, 361–390 (2020).
  60. \JournalTitlePhysical Review Letters 131, 076801 (2023).
  61. \JournalTitlePhysical Review Letters 129, 255702 (2022).
  62. \JournalTitleThe Journal of Physical Chemistry Letters 8, 1476–1483 (2017).
  63. \JournalTitleProceedings of the National Academy of Sciences 121, e2322040121 (2024).
  64. \JournalTitleChem. Sci. pp. – (2024).
  65. (Curran Associates, Inc.), Vol. 36, pp. 60585–60598 (2023).
  66. \JournalTitlePhys. Rev. B 102, 041121 (2020).
  67. \JournalTitleThe Journal of Chemical Physics 158 (2023).
  68. \JournalTitlenpj Computational Materials 5, 125 (2019).
  69. \JournalTitleJournal of Chemical Theory and Computation 19, 7908–7923 (2023).
  70. \JournalTitleJournal of Chemical Theory and Computation 19, 6151–6159 (2023).
  71. \JournalTitleAnnual Review of Biophysics 45, 253–278 (2016).
  72. \JournalTitleNature 596, 583–589 (2021).
  73. \JournalTitleScience 373, 871–876 (2021).
  74. \JournalTitleNature 630, 493–500 (2024).
  75. \JournalTitleNature 620, 1089–1100 (2023).
  76. \JournalTitleNature Structural & Molecular Biology 29, 1–2 (2022).
  77. \JournalTitleeLife 11, e75751 (2022).
  78. \JournalTitleNature 625, 832–839 (2024).
  79. \JournalTitlePLOS Computational Biology 18, 1–16 (2022).
  80. \JournalTitleNature 450, 964–972 (2007).
  81. GR Bowman, Alphafold and protein folding: Not dead yet! the frontier is conformational ensembles. \JournalTitleAnnual Review of Biomedical Data Science (2024).
  82. \JournalTitleJournal of Chemical Theory and Computation 19, 4351–4354 (2023) PMID: 37171364.
  83. \JournalTitleJournal of Chemical Theory and Computation 19, 4355–4363 (2023) PMID: 36948209.
  84. \JournalTitleJournal of Chemical Information and Modeling 64, 2789–2797 (2024) PMID: 37981824.
  85. \JournalTitleeLife Sciences Publications, Ltd (2024).
  86. \JournalTitleScience 365, eaaw1147 (2019).
  87. (2023).
  88. \JournalTitleNucleic Acids Research 52, D384–D392 (2023).
  89. \JournalTitleNature Machine Intelligence 6, 558?567 (2024).
  90. \JournalTitleNature Machine Intelligence 6, 195–208 (2024).
  91. \JournalTitleChemical Society Reviews 50, 2224–2243 (2021).
  92. \JournalTitleJournal of Molecular Biology p. 168552 (2024).
  93. \JournalTitleProceedings of the National Academy of Sciences 77, 6309–6313 (1980).
  94. M Zuker, On finding all suboptimal foldings of an rna molecule. \JournalTitleScience 244, 48–52 (1989).
  95. M Zuker, Mfold web server for nucleic acid folding and hybridization prediction. \JournalTitleNucleic acids research 31, 3406–3415 (2003).
  96. \JournalTitlePloS one 9, e107504 (2014).
  97. \JournalTitleNature 452, 51–55 (2008).
  98. \JournalTitleProceedings of the National Academy of Sciences 108, 20573–20578 (2011).
  99. \JournalTitleStructure 28, 963–976 (2020).
  100. \JournalTitleBioRxiv pp. 2022–05 (2022).
  101. \JournalTitleNature Communications 14, 7266 (2023).
  102. \JournalTitleNature Communications 14, 5745 (2023).
  103. \JournalTitleNucleic acids research 31, 439–441 (2003).
  104. Rnacentral: a hub of information for non-coding rna sequences. \JournalTitleNucleic Acids Research 47, D221–D229 (2019).
  105. \JournalTitleBMC structural biology 19, 1–11 (2019).
  106. \JournalTitleNature communications 12, 2777 (2021).
  107. \JournalTitleNucleic acids research 43, e63–e63 (2015).
  108. \JournalTitleScience 373, 1047–1051 (2021).
  109. \JournalTitleNucleic acids research 51, 3341–3356 (2023).
  110. \JournalTitleProteins: Structure, Function, and Bioinformatics 91, 1771–1778 (2023).
  111. \JournalTitleNAR genomics and bioinformatics 4, lqac012 (2022).
  112. \JournalTitlearXiv preprint arXiv:2204.00300 (2022).
  113. \JournalTitlebioRxiv pp. 2023–07 (2023).
  114. \JournalTitlebioRxiv pp. 2023–01 (2023).
  115. \JournalTitlebioRxiv pp. 2023–12 (2023).
  116. \JournalTitleNature Machine Intelligence 6, 449–460 (2024).
  117. \JournalTitlearXiv preprint arXiv:2207.01586 (2022).
  118. \JournalTitlebioRxiv pp. 2022–09 (2022).
  119. \JournalTitlebioRxiv (2023).
  120. \JournalTitleScience 384, eadl2528 (2024).
  121. \JournalTitleProteins: Structure, Function, and Bioinformatics 91, 1747–1770 (2023).
  122. \JournalTitleJournal of molecular biology 434, 167802 (2022).
  123. \JournalTitleNature 617, 835–841 (2023).
  124. \JournalTitleCurrent Opinion in Structural Biology 88, 102908 (2024).
  125. \JournalTitleNature reviews microbiology 10, 255–265 (2012).
  126. \JournalTitleAnnual review of biophysics and biomolecular structure 26, 113–137 (1997).
  127. \JournalTitleJournal of the American Chemical Society 142, 907–921 (2019).
  128. \JournalTitlearXiv preprint arXiv:2308.14885 (2023).

Summary

  • The paper presents a detailed roadmap integrating generative AI with computational chemistry to predict emergent phenomena.
  • It assesses methods from autoencoders to diffusion models, highlighting improvements in molecular structure and dynamics prediction.
  • The study demonstrates that combining AI with statistical mechanics enhances simulation reliability and accelerates force field development.

Generative Artificial Intelligence for Computational Chemistry: A Roadmap to Predicting Emergent Phenomena

The paper "Generative Artificial Intelligence for Computational Chemistry: A Roadmap to Predicting Emergent Phenomena" provides a detailed analysis of the intersections between Generative AI (GenAI) and computational chemistry. Authored by Pratyush Tiwary and colleagues, this work has significant implications for the field, especially in understanding how GenAI can be leveraged to predict emergent chemical phenomena.

Theoretical Background

The paper begins by establishing a firm theoretical foundation, covering essential concepts in computational chemistry and Generative AI. Notable concepts in computational chemistry include the potential energy surface (PES), force fields, thermodynamic ensembles, collective variables, free energy surfaces, and molecular simulations. These form the backbone of many computational studies and simulations. In the context of Generative AI, key notions such as latent variables, priors, loss functions, training/testing validations, regularization, embedding, and attention mechanisms are elucidated.

Generative AI Methods for Computational Chemistry

Autoencoders and Derived Methods

Autoencoders (AEs), particularly variational autoencoders (VAEs) and their derivatives, have shown effectiveness in molecular simulations by learning and representing high-dimensional molecular data in a low-dimensional latent space. The paper discusses various improvements over basic autoencoders, such as integrating meaningful priors, adding physics-based loss terms, and generalizing output tasks to improve autoencoders' ability to classify and generate diverse molecular structures.

Generative Adversarial Networks (GANs)

The paper highlights the strengths and limitations of GANs in generating realistic data, such as molecular structures, through an adversarial framework involving a generator and a discriminator. GAN variants like cGANs and WGANs have been applied successfully in molecule generation and protein modeling but face challenges like mode collapse and training instability. The paper also indicates a decline in the popularity of GANs due to advancements in newer methods like diffusion models and RL-based approaches.

Reinforcement Learning (RL)

Reinforcement learning has been effectively utilized in molecule generation and conformational exploration, albeit with challenges like high dimensionality, data scarcity, and mode collapse. Innovations such as adaptive RL, Maximum Entropy RL, and GFlowNets signify promising directions in enhancing RL's robustness in handling complex molecular systems.

Flow-Based Methods

Flow models, including normalizing flows and diffusion models, garnered attention for their ability to sample from complex distributions efficiently. The parameterization of invertible transformations and diffusion processes are based on principles from non-equilibrium thermodynamics, making these methods well-suited for sampling equilibrium states and generating realistic molecular structures.

Recurrent Neural Networks (RNNs) and LLMs

RNNs and transformer-based models, such as LLMs, have been deployed successfully in sequence-based tasks like protein structure prediction. Despite their impressive capabilities, these models face limitations in extrapolation and preventing bias within datasets. Integrating LLMs with statistical mechanics, as illustrated in some recent studies, could enhance their applicability in predicting dynamic molecular behaviors.

Selected Applications in Computational Chemistry

Ab Initio Quantum Chemistry and Coarse-Grained (CG) Force Fields

Generative AI methods facilitate the development of machine learning force fields (MLFFs) and coarse-grained models, providing quicker yet accurate simulations. MLFFs aim to replicate quantum-level accuracy, while CG models effectively reduce computational complexity for larger molecular systems. Current challenges involve enhancing the ability of MLFFs to generalize beyond training datasets and refining back-mapping techniques for CG models.

Protein Structure and Conformation Prediction

Emergent AI-driven methods like AlphaFold2 and RoseTTAFold have revolutionized protein structure prediction. However, to predict non-native metastable structures, approaches like AF2RAVE and AlphaFlow integrate AI with molecular dynamics (MD) simulations. These hybrid models better capture conformational flexibility and protein dynamics, essential for accurate functional predictions.

RNA Structure Prediction

The paper also addresses RNA structure prediction, outlining the need for methods capable of generating dynamic ensembles rather than static structures. Generative AI models tailored to RNA tertiary structure predictions, such as AF3 and RF2NA, are improving, yet generating accurate Boltzmann-weighted structural ensembles remains an ongoing challenge. Integrating path sampling and statistical mechanics principles, exemplified in Thermodynamic Maps, provides promising avenues for future research.

Desirables from Generative AI for Chemistry

The authors advocate several key attributes to enhance Generative AI's utility in chemistry:

  1. Integration of Core Chemical Principles: Close integration with statistical mechanics and thermodynamics ensures more physically grounded models.
  2. Improved Interpretability and Reliability Testing: Developing frameworks to enhance the interpretability and reliability of AI predictions.
  3. Out-of-Distribution Generalization: Designing AI models to effectively generalize beyond the training data.
  4. Pragmatic Data Handling: Managing data to avoid the pitfalls of overreliance on large datasets and ensuring effective data segregation.
  5. Focus on Emergent Phenomena: Strengthening AI capability to predict phenomena emerging from large, long-duration simulations.

Critical Assessment and Future Outlook

Generative AI offers significant advances in molecular simulations and computational chemistry, notably in force field development, structure prediction, and accelerated simulations. However, challenges remain in reliable prediction of chemical function from chemical identity. Integrating statistical mechanics and thermodynamics into these models could bridge this gap, providing more accurate and interpretable outcomes. Future developments will benefit from a symbiotic relationship between AI advancements and fundamental chemical principles.

In conclusion, this paper illuminates the road ahead for integrating Generative AI into computational chemistry, addressing current capabilities, limitations, and future directions. Fully leveraging the strengths of both domains promises to accelerate scientific discoveries and deepen our understanding of complex chemical systems.