Boltzmann generators: Sampling equilibrium states of many-body systems with deep learning

Efficient sampling of equilibrium states Molecular dynamics or Monte Carlo methods can be used to sample equilibrium states, but these methods become computationally expensive for complex systems, where the transition from one equilibrium state to another may only occur through rare events. Noé et al. used neural networks and deep learning to generate distributions of independent soft condensed-matter samples at equilibrium (see the Perspective by Tuckerman). Supervised training is used to construct invertible transformations between the coordinates of the complex system of interest and simple Gaussian coordinates of the same dimensionality. Thus, configurations can be sampled in this simpler coordinate system and then transformed back into the complex one using the correct statistical weighting. Science, this issue p. eaaw1147; see also p. 982 By combining deep learning and statistical mechanics, neural networks sample the equilibrium distribution of many-body systems. INTRODUCTION Statistical mechanics aims to compute the average behavior of physical systems on the basis of their microscopic constituents. For example, what is the probability that a protein will be folded at a given temperature? If we could answer such questions efficiently, then we could not only comprehend the workings of molecules and materials, but we could also design drug molecules and materials with new properties in a principled way. To this end, we need to compute statistics of the equilibrium states of many-body systems. In the protein-folding example, this means to consider each of the astronomically many ways to place all protein atoms in space, to compute the probability of each such “configuration” in the equilibrium ensemble, and then to compare the total probability of unfolded and folded configurations. As enumeration of all configurations is infeasible, one instead must attempt to sample them from their equilibrium distribution. However, we currently have no way to generate equilibrium samples of many-body systems in “one shot.” The main approach is thus to start with one configuration, e.g., the folded protein state, and make tiny changes to it over time, e.g., by using Markov-chain Monte Carlo or molecular dynamics (MD). However, these simulations get trapped in metastable (long-lived) states: For example, sampling a single folding or unfolding event with atomistic MD may take a year on a supercomputer. RATIONALE Here, we combine deep machine learning and statistical mechanics to develop Boltzmann generators. Boltzmann generators are trained on the energy function of a many-body system and learn to provide unbiased, one-shot samples from its equilibrium state. This is achieved by training an invertible neural network to learn a coordinate transformation from a system’s configurations to a so-called latent space representation, in which the low-energy configurations of different states are close to each other and can be easily sampled. Because of the invertibility, every latent space sample can be back-transformed to a system configuration with high Boltzmann probability (Fig. 1). We then employ statistical mechanics, which offers a rich set of tools for reweighting the distribution generated by the neural network to the Boltzmann distribution. RESULTS Boltzmann generators can be trained to directly generate independent samples of low-energy structures of condensed-matter systems and protein molecules. When initialized with a few structures from different metastable states, Boltzmann generators can generate statistically independent samples from these states and efficiently compute the free-energy differences between them. This capability could be used to compute relative stabilities between different experimental structures of protein or other organic molecules, which is currently a very challenging problem. Boltzmann generators can also learn a notion of “reaction coordinates”: Simple linear interpolations between points in latent space have a high probability of corresponding to physically realistic, low-energy transition pathways. Finally, by using established sampling methods such as Metropolis Monte Carlo in the latent space variables, Boltzmann generators can discover new states and gradually explore state space. CONCLUSION Boltzmann generators can overcome rare event–sampling problems in many-body systems by learning to generate unbiased equilibrium samples from different metastable states in one shot. They differ conceptually from established enhanced sampling methods, as no reaction coordinates are needed to drive them between metastable states. However, by applying existing sampling methods in the latent spaces learned by Boltzmann generators, a plethora of new opportunities opens up to design efficient sampling methods for many-body systems. Boltzmann generators overcome sampling problems between long-lived states. The Boltzmann generator works as follows: 1. We sample from a simple (e.g., Gaussian) distribution. 2. An invertible deep neural network is trained to transform this simple distribution to a distribution pX(x) that is similar to the desired Boltzmann distribution of the system of interest. 3. To compute thermodynamics quantities, the samples are reweighted to the Boltzmann distribution using statistical mechanics methods. Computing equilibrium states in condensed-matter many-body systems, such as solvated proteins, is a long-standing challenge. Lacking methods for generating statistically independent equilibrium samples in “one shot,” vast computational effort is invested for simulating these systems in small steps, e.g., using molecular dynamics. Combining deep learning and statistical mechanics, we developed Boltzmann generators, which are shown to generate unbiased one-shot equilibrium samples of representative condensed-matter systems and proteins. Boltzmann generators use neural networks to learn a coordinate transformation of the complex configurational equilibrium distribution to a distribution that can be easily sampled. Accurate computation of free-energy differences and discovery of new configurations are demonstrated, providing a statistical mechanics tool that can avoid rare events during sampling without prior knowledge of reaction coordinates.

[1]  Alexander P Lyubartsev,et al.  A new AMBER-compatible force field parameter set for alkanes , 2014, Journal of Molecular Modeling.

[2]  J S Smith,et al.  ANI-1: an extensible neural network potential with DFT accuracy at force field computational cost , 2016, Chemical science.

[3]  F. Noé,et al.  Collective variables for the study of long-time kinetics from molecular trajectories: theory and methods. , 2017, Current opinion in structural biology.

[4]  G. Parisi,et al.  Simulated tempering: a new Monte Carlo scheme , 1992, hep-lat/9205018.

[5]  Frank Noé,et al.  PyEMMA 2: A Software Package for Estimation, Validation, and Analysis of Markov Models. , 2015, Journal of chemical theory and computation.

[6]  Shakir Mohamed,et al.  Variational Inference with Normalizing Flows , 2015, ICML.

[7]  H. Kuhn The Hungarian method for the assignment problem , 1955 .

[8]  Guigang Zhang,et al.  Deep Learning , 2016, Int. J. Semantic Comput..

[9]  Jimmy Ba,et al.  Adam: A Method for Stochastic Optimization , 2014, ICLR.

[10]  Michael R. Shirts,et al.  Statistically optimal analysis of samples from multiple equilibrium states. , 2008, The Journal of chemical physics.

[11]  Christophe Chipot,et al.  Exploring Multidimensional Free Energy Landscapes Using Time-Dependent Biases on Collective Variables. , 2010, Journal of chemical theory and computation.

[12]  David Duvenaud,et al.  FFJORD: Free-form Continuous Dynamics for Scalable Reversible Generative Models , 2018, ICLR.

[13]  David Chandler,et al.  Transition path sampling: throwing ropes over rough mountain passes, in the dark. , 2002, Annual review of physical chemistry.

[14]  Grubmüller,et al.  Predicting slow structural transitions in macromolecular systems: Conformational flooding. , 1995, Physical review. E, Statistical physics, plasmas, fluids, and related interdisciplinary topics.

[15]  David L. Mobley,et al.  Guidelines for the analysis of free energy calculations , 2015, Journal of Computer-Aided Molecular Design.

[16]  Berend Smit,et al.  Understanding Molecular Simulation , 2001 .

[17]  David Chandler,et al.  Finding transition pathways: throwing ropes over rough mountain passes, in the dark , 1998 .

[18]  Daan Frenkel,et al.  New Monte Carlo method to compute the free energy of arbitrary solids. Application to the fcc and hcp phases of hard spheres , 1984 .

[19]  Frank Noé,et al.  Machine Learning of Coarse-Grained Molecular Dynamics Force Fields , 2018, ACS central science.

[20]  A. Laio,et al.  Escaping free-energy minima , 2002, Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America.

[21]  Joseph A. Bank,et al.  Supporting Online Material Materials and Methods Figs. S1 to S10 Table S1 References Movies S1 to S3 Atomic-level Characterization of the Structural Dynamics of Proteins , 2022 .

[22]  Klaus-Robert Müller,et al.  SchNet: A continuous-filter convolutional neural network for modeling quantum interactions , 2017, NIPS.

[23]  Yoshua Bengio,et al.  NICE: Non-linear Independent Components Estimation , 2014, ICLR.

[24]  Qiang Cui,et al.  Faculty Opinions recommendation of Boltzmann generators: Sampling equilibrium states of many-body systems with deep learning. , 2019, Faculty Opinions – Post-Publication Peer Review of the Biomedical Literature.

[25]  Daniel M Zuckerman,et al.  Simple estimation of absolute free energies for biomolecules. , 2006, The Journal of chemical physics.

[26]  Huo,et al.  Optical third-harmonic generation in reflection from crystalline and amorphous samples of silicon. , 1986, Physical review letters.

[27]  Max Welling,et al.  Auto-Encoding Variational Bayes , 2013, ICLR.

[28]  Alán Aspuru-Guzik,et al.  Automatic Chemical Design Using a Data-Driven Continuous Representation of Molecules , 2016, ACS central science.

[29]  D. Case,et al.  Exploring protein native states and large‐scale conformational changes with a modified generalized born model , 2004, Proteins.

[30]  J. Kirkwood Statistical Mechanics of Fluid Mixtures , 1935 .

[31]  Robert Huber,et al.  Structure of bovine pancreatic trypsin inhibitor , 1984 .

[32]  Mark E Tuckerman,et al.  Locating landmarks on high-dimensional free energy surfaces , 2015, Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences.

[33]  Berend Smit,et al.  Chapter 3 – Monte Carlo Simulations , 2002 .

[34]  A. Palmer,et al.  Disulfide bond isomerization in basic pancreatic trypsin inhibitor: multisite chemical exchange quantified by CPMG relaxation dispersion and chemical shift modeling. , 2003, Journal of the American Chemical Society.

[35]  David D L Minh,et al.  Nonequilibrium candidate Monte Carlo is an efficient tool for equilibrium simulation , 2011, Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences.

[36]  Heiga Zen,et al.  Parallel WaveNet: Fast High-Fidelity Speech Synthesis , 2017, ICML.

[37]  Zhongwei Zhu,et al.  Using novel variable transformations to enhance conformational sampling in molecular dynamics. , 2002, Physical review letters.

[38]  Diwakar Shukla,et al.  OpenMM 4: A Reusable, Extensible, Hardware Independent Library for High Performance Molecular Simulation. , 2013, Journal of chemical theory and computation.

[39]  R. Dror,et al.  Improved side-chain torsion potentials for the Amber ff99SB protein force field , 2010, Proteins.

[40]  G. Torrie,et al.  Nonphysical sampling distributions in Monte Carlo free-energy estimation: Umbrella sampling , 1977 .

[41]  Yoshua Bengio,et al.  Generative Adversarial Networks , 2014, ArXiv.

[42]  Toni Giorgino,et al.  Identification of slow molecular order parameters for Markov model construction. , 2013, The Journal of chemical physics.

[43]  William G. Hoover,et al.  Melting Transition and Communal Entropy for Hard Spheres , 1968 .

[44]  Michele Parrinello,et al.  Generalized neural-network representation of high-dimensional potential-energy surfaces. , 2007, Physical review letters.

[45]  K. Hukushima,et al.  Exchange Monte Carlo Method and Application to Spin Glass Simulations , 1995, cond-mat/9512035.

[46]  Jaakko Lehtinen,et al.  Progressive Growing of GANs for Improved Quality, Stability, and Variation , 2017, ICLR.

[47]  E. Tabak,et al.  DENSITY ESTIMATION BY DUAL ASCENT OF THE LOG-LIKELIHOOD ∗ , 2010 .

[48]  Prafulla Dhariwal,et al.  Glow: Generative Flow with Invertible 1x1 Convolutions , 2018, NeurIPS.

[49]  Samy Bengio,et al.  Density estimation using Real NVP , 2016, ICLR.

[50]  K. Müller,et al.  Fast and accurate modeling of molecular atomization energies with machine learning. , 2011, Physical review letters.

[51]  Jean-Philip Piquemal,et al.  Tinker 8: Software Tools for Molecular Design. , 2018, Journal of chemical theory and computation.