Cited by 63Advanced Chemical Physics StudiesMachine Learning in Materials ScienceComputational Drug Discovery Methods

Generalized Density-Functional Tight-Binding Repulsive Potentials from Unsupervised Machine Learning

Open access
Kranz, Julian J., Kubillus, Maximilian, Ramakrishnan, Raghunathan, von Lilienfeld, O. Anatole, Elstner, Marcus·2018·Journal of Chemical Theory and Computation

Abstract

We combine the approximate density-functional tight-binding (DFTB) method with unsupervised machine learning. This allows us to improve transferability and accuracy, make use of large quantum chemical data sets for the parametrization, and efficiently automatize the parametrization process of DFTB. For this purpose, generalized pair-potentials are introduced, where the chemical environment is included during the learning process, leading to more specific effective two-body potentials. We train on energies and forces of equilibrium and nonequilibrium structures of 2100 molecules, and test on ∼130 000 organic molecules containing O, N, C, H, and F atoms. Atomization energies of the reference method can be reproduced within an error of ∼2.6 kcal/mol, indicating drastic improvement over standard DFTB.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1021/acs.jctc.7b00933

Cites

46 of 46 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Claims the paper makes

We couldn’t retrieve this paper’s full text, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

  • Clustering can be used to select the most relevant reference configurations from a database, or to partition it into regions on which specialized models can be trained.

    “Clustering can be used to select the most relevant reference configurations from a database 109 , or to partition it into regions on which specialized models can be trained. 110”

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

3 of the 49 references couldn’t be matched to a known paper.

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Kranz, J. J., Kubillus, M., Ramakrishnan, R., von Lilienfeld, O. A., & Elstner, M.
Affiliations
  • Karlsruhe Institute of Technology (DE)
  • University of Basel (CH)
  • Institute of Physical Chemistry and National Center for Computational Design and Discovery of Novel Materials (MARVEL), Department of Chemistry, University of Basel, Klingelbergstrasse 80, CH-4056 Basel, Switzerland
Corresponding author
Elstner, Marcus
Venue
Journal of Chemical Theory and Computation
Published
2018-03-26
Volume
14
Issue
5
Pages
2341-2352
ISSN
  • 1549-9618 (ISSN-L)
  • 1549-9626
OpenAlex
W2790700814
Cited by
63
References
49
Citations by year
2026: 2 · 2025: 8 · 2024: 3 · 2023: 10 · 2022: 9 · 2021: 6 · 2020: 9 · 2019: 11 · 2018: 5
FWCI
3.58
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Licence
other-oa
Locations
  • Journal of Chemical Theory and Computation (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • edoc (University of Basel) (acceptedVersion, other-oa)
  • edoc (University of Basel)
Funders
  • Schweizerischer Nationalfonds zur F?rderung der Wissenschaftlichen Forschung (PP00P2_138932)
  • Deutsche Forschungsgemeinschaft (SFB 1249)
Topics
  • Physical Sciences › Physics and Astronomy › Atomic and Molecular Physics, and Optics › Advanced Chemical Physics Studies
  • Physical Sciences › Materials Science › Materials Chemistry › Machine Learning in Materials Science
  • Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Computational Theory and Mathematics › Computational Drug Discovery Methods
Keywords
density functional tight binding, repulsive potential, unsupervised learning, potential parameterization, chemical environment, transferability, atomization energies, organic compounds, non-equilibrium structures

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review