ArticleJournal of chemical theory and computation2025
Exploring the Design Space of Machine Learning Models for Quantum Chemistry with a Fully Differentiable Framework.
Article in Journal of chemical theory and computation, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 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
4 citing papers in PubMed.
- Predictive free energy simulations through hierarchical distillation of quantum Hamiltonians.Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America · 2026Article
- Representative Random Sampling of Chemical Space.Journal of chemical theory and computation · 2025Article
- Weighted active space protocol for multireference machine-learned potentials.Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America · 2025Article
- Exploring the Design Space of Machine Learning Models for Quantum Chemistry with a Fully Differentiable Framework.Journal of chemical theory and computation · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
8 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Traditional atomistic machine learning (ML) models serve as surrogates for quantum mechanical (QM) properties, predicting quantities such as dipole moments and polarizabilities directly from compositions and geometries of atomic configurations. With the emergence of ML approaches to predict the "ingredients" of a QM calculation, such as the ground-state charge density or the effective single-particle Hamiltonian, it has become possible to obtain multiple properties through analytical physics-based operations on these intermediate ML predictions. We present a framework that seamlessly integrates the prediction of an effective electronic Hamiltonian, for both molecular and condensed-phase systems, with PySCFAD, a differentiable QM workflow. This integration facilitates training models indirectly against functions of the Hamiltonian, such as electronic energy levels, dipole moments, polarizability, etc. We then use this framework to explore various possible choices within the design space of hybrid ML/QM models, examining the influence of incorporating multiple targets on model performance and learning a reduced-basis ML Hamiltonian that can reproduce targets computed on a much larger basis. Our benchmarks evaluate the accuracy and transferability of these hybrid models, compare them against predictions of atomic properties from their surrogate models, and provide indications to guide the design of the interface between the ML and QM components of the model.
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.