ArticleChemical science2022
Uncertainty quantification for predictions of atomistic neural networks.
Article in Chemical science, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 9 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
9 citing papers in PubMed.
- Soft Computing Approaches toward Density-Based Analysis of Many-Electron Systems.ACS physical chemistry Au · 2026Review
- Linking Enol-Keto Tautomerization Ratios in β‑Diketones to Their Physical Properties Using Computational Quantum Chemistry.ACS omega · 2026Article
- Uncertainty Calibration in Molecular Machine Learning: Comparing Evidential and Ensemble Approaches.Chemistry (Weinheim an der Bergstrasse, Germany) · 2026Article
- Uncertainty Quantification forChemical reviews · 2026Review
- Crash testing machine learning force fields for molecules, materials, and interfaces: model analysis in the TEA Challenge 2023.Chemical science · 2025Article
- PiNN: Equivariant Neural Network Suite for Modeling Electrochemical Systems.Journal of chemical theory and computation · 2025Article
- Outlier-detection for reactive machine learned potential energy surfaces.npj computational materials · 2025Article
- Uncertain of uncertainties? A comparison of uncertainty quantification metrics for chemical data sets.Journal of cheminformatics · 2023Article
- Neural network potentials for chemistry: concepts, applications and prospects.Digital discovery · 2023Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
The value of uncertainty quantification on predictions for trained neural networks (NNs) on quantum chemical reference data is quantitatively explored. For this, the architecture of the PhysNet NN was suitably modified and the resulting model (PhysNet-DER) was evaluated with different metrics to quantify its calibration, the quality of its predictions, and whether prediction error and the predicted uncertainty can be correlated. Training on the QM9 database and evaluating data in the test set within and outside the distribution indicate that error and uncertainty are not linearly related. However, the observed variance provides insight into the quality of the data used for training. Additionally, the influence of the chemical space covered by the training data set was studied by using a biased database. The results clarify that noise and redundancy complicate property prediction for molecules even in cases for which changes - such as double bond migration in two otherwise identical molecules - are small. The model was also applied to a real database of tautomerization reactions. Analysis of the distance between members in feature space in combination with other parameters shows that redundant information in the training dataset can lead to large variances and small errors whereas the presence of similar but unspecific information returns large errors but small variances. This was,
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.