ArticleJournal of chemical information and modeling2024
Spatially Resolved Uncertainties for Machine Learning Potentials.
Article in Journal of chemical information and modeling, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 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
6 citing papers in PubMed.
- How Realistic Are Idealized Copper Surfaces? A Machine Learning Study of Rough Copper-Water Interfaces.ACS materials Au · 2026Article
- Enhanced Representation-Based Sampling for the Efficient Generation of Data Sets for Machine-Learned Interatomic Potentials.Journal of chemical theory and computation · 2026Article
- Accelerating First-Principles Molecular-Dynamics Thermal Conductivity Calculations for Complex Systems.Journal of chemical theory and computation · 2026Article
- Active learning potentials for first-principles phase diagrams using replica-exchange nested sampling.npj computational materials · 2026Article
- A Simple and Scalable Kernel Density Approach for Reliable Uncertainty Quantification in Atomistic Machine Learning.The journal of physical chemistry letters · 2025Article
- Exploring inhomogeneous surfaces: Ti-rich SrTiODigital discovery · 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
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Machine learning potentials have become an essential tool for atomistic simulations, yielding results close to ab initio simulations at a fraction of computational cost. With recent improvements on the achievable accuracies, the focus has now shifted on the data set composition itself. The reliable identification of erroneously predicted configurations to extend a given data set is therefore of high priority. Yet, uncertainty estimation techniques have achieved mixed results for machine learning potentials. Consequently, a general and versatile method to correlate energy or atomic force uncertainties with the model error has remained elusive to date. In the current work, we show that epistemic uncertainty cannot correlate with model error by definition but can be aggregated over groups of atoms to yield a strong correlation. We demonstrate that our method correctly estimates prediction errors both globally per structure and locally resolved per atom. The direct correlation of local uncertainty and local error is used to design an active learning framework based on identifying local subregions of a large simulation cell and performing ab initio calculations only for the subregion subsequently. We successfully utilized this method to perform active learning in the low-data regime for liquid water.
Indexed as
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.