Bayesian machine learning for quantum molecular dynamics.

This article discusses applications of Bayesian machine learning for quantum molecular dynamics. One particular formulation of quantum dynamics advocated here is in the form of a machine learning simulator of the Schrödinger equation. If combined with the Bayesian statistics, such a simulator allows one to obtain not only the quantum predictions but also the error bars of the dynamical results associated with uncertainties of inputs (such as the potential energy surface or non-adiabatic couplings) into the nuclear Schrödinger equation. Instead of viewing atoms as undergoing dynamics on a given potential energy surface, Bayesian machine learning allows one to formulate the problem as the Schrödinger equation with a non-parametric distribution of potential energy surfaces that becomes conditioned by the desired dynamical properties (such as the experimental measurements). Machine learning models of the Schrödinger equation solutions can identify the sensitivity of the dynamical properties to different parts of the potential surface, the collision energy, angular momentum, external field parameters and basis sets used for the calculations. This can be used to inform the design of efficient quantum dynamics calculations. Machine learning models can also be used to correlate rigorous results with approximate calculations, providing accurate interpolation of exact results. Finally, there is evidence that it is possible to build Bayesian machine learning models capable of physically extrapolating the solutions of the Schrödinger equation. This is particularly valuable as such models could complement common discovery tools to explore physical properties at Hamiltonian parameters not accessible by rigorous quantum calculations or experiments, and potentially be used to accelerate the numerical integration of the nuclear Schrödinger equation.

[1]  Alán Aspuru-Guzik,et al.  Phoenics: A Bayesian Optimizer for Chemistry , 2018, ACS central science.

[2]  R. Kondor,et al.  Gaussian approximation potentials: the accuracy of quantum mechanics, without the electrons. , 2009, Physical review letters.

[3]  Ove Christiansen,et al.  Gaussian process regression to accelerate geometry optimizations relying on numerical differentiation. , 2018, The Journal of chemical physics.

[4]  Alán Aspuru-Guzik,et al.  Neural Networks for the Prediction of Organic Chemistry Reactions , 2016, ACS central science.

[5]  Alex Brown,et al.  A ground state potential energy surface for HONO based on a neural network with exponential fitting functions. , 2017, Physical chemistry chemical physics : PCCP.

[6]  John Z. H. Zhang,et al.  THEORY AND APPLICATION OF QUANTUM MOLECULAR DYNAMICS , 1999 .

[7]  E. Heller,et al.  Cold collisions of complex polyatomic molecules. , 2011, The Journal of chemical physics.

[8]  Sergei Manzhos,et al.  Neural network‐based approaches for building high dimensional and quantum dynamics‐friendly potential energy surfaces , 2015 .

[9]  Klaus-Robert Müller,et al.  Covariate Shift Adaptation by Importance Weighted Cross Validation , 2007, J. Mach. Learn. Res..

[10]  M. R. Peterson,et al.  A refined H3 potential energy surface , 1996 .

[11]  J. Sethna,et al.  Bayesian error estimation in density-functional theory. , 2005, Physical review letters.

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

[13]  Matthias Rupp,et al.  Big Data Meets Quantum Chemistry Approximations: The Δ-Machine Learning Approach. , 2015, Journal of chemical theory and computation.

[14]  H. Rabitz,et al.  A general method for constructing multidimensional molecular potential energy surfaces from ab initio calculations , 1996 .

[15]  R. Krems,et al.  Tuning Bimolecular Chemical Reactions by Electric Fields. , 2014, Physical review letters.

[16]  Zhigang Sun,et al.  H + H2 quantum dynamics using potential energy surfaces based on the XYG3 type of doubly hybrid density functionals: validation of the density functionals. , 2015, The Journal of chemical physics.

[17]  Hua Guo,et al.  Constructing High-Dimensional Neural Network Potential Energy Surfaces for Gas–Surface Scattering and Reactions , 2018 .

[18]  Thomas Bligaard,et al.  Assessing the reliability of calculated catalytic ammonia synthesis rates , 2014, Science.

[19]  Bing Huang,et al.  Boosting Quantum Machine Learning Models with a Multilevel Combination Technique: Pople Diagrams Revisited. , 2018, Journal of chemical theory and computation.

[20]  Joel M. Bowman,et al.  Permutationally invariant potential energy surfaces in high dimensionality , 2009 .

[21]  R. A. Vargas-Hernández,et al.  Six-dimensional potential energy surface for NaK-NaK collisions: Gaussian process representation with correct asymptotic form. , 2019, The Journal of chemical physics.

[22]  Pascal Pernot,et al.  The parameter uncertainty inflation fallacy. , 2016, The Journal of chemical physics.

[23]  Douglas B Kell,et al.  Optimal construction of a fast and accurate polarisable water potential based on multipole moments trained by machine learning. , 2009, Physical chemistry chemical physics : PCCP.

[24]  Bryan M. Wong,et al.  An Efficient and Accurate Formalism for the Treatment of Large Amplitude Intramolecular Motion , 2012, Journal of chemical theory and computation.

[25]  Alessandro De Vita,et al.  A framework for machine‐learning‐augmented multiscale atomistic simulations on parallel supercomputers , 2015 .

[26]  R. A. Vargas-Hernández,et al.  Extrapolating Quantum Observables with Machine Learning: Inferring Multiple Phase Transitions from Properties of a Single Phase. , 2018, Physical review letters.

[27]  Bayesian optimization for the inverse scattering problem in quantum reaction dynamics , 2017, New Journal of Physics.

[28]  T. Carrington,et al.  Calculating vibrational spectra with sum of product basis functions without storing full-dimensional vectors or matrices. , 2014, The Journal of chemical physics.

[29]  D. Kouri,et al.  On magnetic transitions and the interpretation of the partial wave parameter in the CS and IOS approximations in molecular scattering theory , 1978 .

[30]  Y. V. Suleimanov,et al.  Cold NH–NH collisions in a magnetic field: Basis set convergence versus sensitivity to the interaction potential , 2016 .

[31]  R. Krems,et al.  A general method for controlling and resolving rotational orientation of molecules in molecule-surface collisions , 2017, Nature Communications.

[32]  Jörg Behler,et al.  Constructing high‐dimensional neural network potentials: A tutorial review , 2015 .

[33]  Paul L. A. Popelier,et al.  QCTFF: on the construction of a novel protein force field , 2015 .

[34]  M. Beck,et al.  The multiconfiguration time-dependent Hartree (MCTDH) method: A highly efficient algorithm for propa , 1999 .

[35]  D. Kouri,et al.  Quantum mechanical close coupling approach to molecular collisions. jz ‐conserving coupled states approximation , 1974 .

[36]  Khachik Sargsyan,et al.  Uncertainty Quantification in MD Simulations. Part II: Bayesian Inference of Force-Field Parameters , 2012, Multiscale Model. Simul..

[37]  M. Rupp,et al.  Machine learning of molecular electronic properties in chemical compound space , 2013, 1305.7074.

[38]  Hua Guo,et al.  Permutation invariant polynomial neural network approach to fitting potential energy surfaces. IV. Coupled diabatic potential energy matrices. , 2018, The Journal of chemical physics.

[39]  A. W. Porter Catalysis. , 1930, Nature.

[40]  Jun Chen,et al.  A global potential energy surface for the H2 + OH ↔ H2O + H reaction using neural networks. , 2013, The Journal of chemical physics.

[41]  H. Schaefer,et al.  Multi-fidelity Gaussian process modeling for chemical energy surfaces , 2019, Chemical Physics Letters.

[42]  R. A. Vargas-Hernández,et al.  Assessing Gaussian Process Regression and Permutationally Invariant Polynomial Approaches To Represent High-Dimensional Potential Energy Surfaces. , 2018, Journal of chemical theory and computation.

[43]  Alán Aspuru-Guzik,et al.  Convolutional Networks on Graphs for Learning Molecular Fingerprints , 2015, NIPS.

[44]  R. Krems Molecules in Electromagnetic Fields , 2018 .

[45]  R. Krems,et al.  Collision dynamics of polyatomic molecules containing carbon rings at low temperatures. , 2014, The Journal of chemical physics.

[46]  Fernando Pirani,et al.  Atom–bond pairwise additive representation for intermolecular potential energy surfaces , 2004 .

[47]  Jerome Sacks,et al.  Choosing the Sample Size of a Computer Experiment: A Practical Guide , 2009, Technometrics.

[48]  Michael A. Collins,et al.  Molecular potential-energy surfaces for chemical reaction dynamics , 2002 .

[49]  Carl E. Rasmussen,et al.  Additive Gaussian Processes , 2011, NIPS.

[50]  Felix A Faber,et al.  Machine Learning Energies of 2 Million Elpasolite (ABC_{2}D_{6}) Crystals. , 2015, Physical review letters.

[51]  Gábor Csányi,et al.  Gaussian approximation potentials: A brief tutorial introduction , 2015, 1502.01366.

[52]  Christoph H. Lampert,et al.  Learning Equations for Extrapolation and Control , 2018, ICML.

[53]  Dong H. Zhang,et al.  Construction of reactive potential energy surfaces with Gaussian process regression: active data selection , 2018 .

[54]  Costas Papadimitriou,et al.  Fusing heterogeneous data for the calibration of molecular dynamics force fields using hierarchical Bayesian models. , 2016, The Journal of chemical physics.

[55]  R. Krems,et al.  Rate Constants for Fine-structure Excitations in O–H Collisions with Error Bars Obtained by Machine Learning , 2017, 1701.01897.

[56]  Aditya Kamath,et al.  Neural networks vs Gaussian process regression for representing potential energy surfaces: A comparative study of fit quality and vibrational spectrum accuracy. , 2018, The Journal of chemical physics.

[57]  T. Carrington,et al.  A nested molecule-independent neural network approach for high-quality potential fits. , 2006, The journal of physical chemistry. A.

[58]  P. Jankowski,et al.  On the importance of full-dimensionality in low-energy molecular scattering calculations , 2016, Scientific Reports.

[59]  Markus Reiher,et al.  Reliable Estimation of Prediction Uncertainty for Physicochemical Property Models. , 2017, Journal of chemical theory and computation.

[60]  H. Rabitz,et al.  A fast algorithm for evaluating multidimensional potential energy surfaces , 1997 .

[61]  P. McGuire Coupled‐states approach for elastic and for rotationally and vibrationally inelastic atom–molecule collisions , 1975 .

[62]  R. Krems,et al.  Quantum theory of chemical reactions in the presence of electromagnetic fields. , 2008, The Journal of chemical physics.

[63]  Costas Papadimitriou,et al.  Bayesian uncertainty quantification and propagation in molecular dynamics simulations: a high performance computing framework. , 2012, The Journal of chemical physics.

[64]  Elastic and inelastic collisions of 2 Σ molecules in a magnetic field , 2013, 1308.0771.

[65]  Ryan P. Adams,et al.  Design of efficient molecular organic light-emitting diodes by a high-throughput virtual screening and experimental approach. , 2016, Nature materials.

[66]  Danna Zhou,et al.  d. , 1934, Microbial pathogenesis.

[67]  M. Rupp,et al.  Fourier series of atomic radial distribution functions: A molecular fingerprint for machine learning models of quantum chemical properties , 2013, 1307.2918.

[68]  D. Manolopoulos,et al.  Spectroscopic observation of resonances in the F + H2 reaction , 2015, Science.

[69]  R. Krems,et al.  Gaussian Process Model for Collision Dynamics of Complex Molecules. , 2015, Physical review letters.

[70]  吴剑鸣,et al.  The X1 family of methods that combines B3LYP with neural network corrections for an accurate yet efficient prediction of thermochemistry , 2015 .

[71]  Li Li,et al.  Understanding Kernel Ridge Regression: Common behaviors from simple functions to density functionals , 2015, ArXiv.

[72]  Alex Smola,et al.  Kernel methods in machine learning , 2007, math/0701907.

[73]  J. Behler Neural network potential-energy surfaces in chemistry: a tool for large-scale simulations. , 2011, Physical chemistry chemical physics : PCCP.

[74]  P. Żuchowski,et al.  Cold collisions of N (4S) atoms and NH (3Σ) molecules in magnetic fields. , 2010, Physical chemistry chemical physics : PCCP.

[75]  D. Colbert,et al.  A novel discrete variable representation for quantum mechanical reactive scattering via the S-matrix Kohn method , 1992 .

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

[77]  Sergei Manzhos,et al.  A random-sampling high dimensional model representation neural network for building potential energy surfaces. , 2006, The Journal of chemical physics.

[78]  Pascal Pernot,et al.  Calibration of forcefields for molecular simulation: Sequential design of computer experiments for building cost‐efficient kriging metamodels , 2014, J. Comput. Chem..

[79]  Rampi Ramprasad,et al.  Adaptive machine learning framework to accelerate ab initio molecular dynamics , 2015 .

[80]  J. Hutson,et al.  Production of ultracold NH molecules by sympathetic cooling with Mg. , 2009, Physical review letters.

[81]  J. Soler,et al.  Optimization of an exchange-correlation density functional for water. , 2016, The Journal of chemical physics.

[82]  Christoph H. Lampert,et al.  Extrapolation and learning equations , 2016, ICLR.

[83]  Felix A Faber,et al.  Crystal structure representations for machine learning models of formation energies , 2015, 1503.07406.

[84]  D. Manolopoulos,et al.  Resonances in bimolecular reactions , 2002 .

[85]  Hua Guo,et al.  Permutation invariant polynomial neural network approach to fitting potential energy surfaces. , 2013, The Journal of chemical physics.

[86]  Roman V. Krems,et al.  Efficient non-parametric fitting of potential energy surfaces for polyatomic molecules with Gaussian processes , 2015, 1509.06473.

[87]  Joshua B. Tenenbaum,et al.  Structure Discovery in Nonparametric Regression through Compositional Kernel Search , 2013, ICML.

[88]  Walter Thiel,et al.  Structure-based sampling and self-correcting machine learning for accurate calculations of potential energy surfaces and vibrational levels. , 2017, The Journal of chemical physics.

[89]  H. Rabitz,et al.  Reproducing kernel Hilbert space interpolation methods as a paradigm of high dimensional model representations: Application to multidimensional potential energy surface construction , 2003 .

[90]  J. Behler Perspective: Machine learning potentials for atomistic simulations. , 2016, The Journal of chemical physics.

[91]  Pascal Pernot,et al.  Statistical approaches to forcefield calibration and prediction uncertainty in molecular simulation. , 2011, The Journal of chemical physics.

[92]  T Hollebeek,et al.  Constructing multidimensional molecular potential energy surfaces from ab initio data. , 2003, Annual review of physical chemistry.

[93]  P. Żuchowski,et al.  The prospects of sympathetic cooling of NH molecules with Li atoms , 2010, 1009.5505.

[94]  D. Secrest,et al.  A recoupled states approximation for molecular scattering theory , 1984 .

[95]  G. Schwarz Estimating the Dimension of a Model , 1978 .

[96]  Jeremy O Richardson,et al.  Ab initio instanton rate theory made efficient using Gaussian process regression. , 2018, Faraday discussions.

[97]  P. Popelier,et al.  Potential energy surfaces fitted by artificial neural networks. , 2010, The journal of physical chemistry. A.

[98]  Elena Uteva,et al.  Active learning in Gaussian process interpolation of potential energy surfaces. , 2018, The Journal of chemical physics.

[99]  A. O'Hagan,et al.  Bayesian calibration of computer models , 2001 .

[100]  Hua Guo,et al.  Representing Global Reactive Potential Energy Surfaces Using Gaussian Processes. , 2017, The journal of physical chemistry. A.

[101]  Alán Aspuru-Guzik,et al.  ChemOS: Orchestrating autonomous experimentation , 2018, Science Robotics.