ArticleJournal of chemical theory and computation2023
Ultrafast Electronic Coupling Estimators: Neural Networks versus Physics-Based Approaches.
Article in Journal of chemical theory and computation, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 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
3 citing papers in PubMed.
- Size-Transferable Prediction of Excited State Properties for Molecular Assemblies with a Machine Learning Exciton Model.The journal of physical chemistry letters · 2025Article
- Thermoelectric transport in molecular crystals driven by gradients of thermal electronic disorder.Science advances · 2024Article
- Machine-Learned Potentials by Active Learning from Organic Crystal Structure Prediction Landscapes.The journal of physical chemistry. A · 2024Article
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
Fast and accurate estimation of electronic coupling matrix elements between molecules is essential for the simulation of charge transfer phenomena in chemistry, materials science, and biology. Here we investigate neural-network-based coupling estimators combined with different protocols for sampling reference data (random, farthest point, and query by committee) and compare their performance to the physics-based analytic overlap method (AOM), introduced previously. We find that neural network approaches can give smaller errors than AOM, in particular smaller maximum errors, while they require an order of magnitude more reference data than AOM, typically one hundred to several hundred training points, down from several thousand required in previous ML works. A Δ-ML approach taking AOM as a baseline is found to give the best overall performance at a relatively small computational overhead of about a factor of 2. Highly flexible π-conjugated organic molecules like non-fullerene acceptors are found to be a particularly challenging case for ML because of the varying (de)localization of the frontier orbitals for different intramolecular geometries sampled along molecular dynamics trajectories. Here the local symmetry functions used in ML are insufficient, and long-range descriptors are expected to give improved performance.
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.