Extending atomic decomposition and many-body representation with a chemistry-motivated approach to machine learning potentials

1. Bartlett, R. J. & Musiał, M. Coupled-cluster theory in quantum chemistry. Rev. Mod. Phys. 79, 291–352 (2007).

   Article  Google Scholar 

2. Gkeka, P. et al. Machine learning force fields and coarse-grained variables in molecular dynamics: application to materials and biological systems. J. Chem. Theory Comput. 16, 4757–4775 (2020).

   Article  Google Scholar 

3. Deringer, V. L., Caro, M. A. & Csányi, G. Machine learning interatomic potentials as emerging tools for materials science. Adv. Mat. 31, 1902765 (2019).

   Article  Google Scholar 

4. Manzhos, S., Dawes, R. & Carrington, T. Neural network-based approaches for building high dimensional and quantum dynamics-friendly potential energy surfaces. Int. J. Quantum Chem. 115, 1012–1020 (2014).

   Article  Google Scholar 

5. Manzhos, S. & Carrington Jr, T. Neural network potential energy surfaces for small molecules and reactions. Chem. Rev. 121, 10187–10217 (2020).

   Article  Google Scholar 

6. Meuwly, M. Machine learning for chemical reactions. Chem. Rev. 121, 10218–10239 (2021).

   Article  Google Scholar 

7. Braams, B. J. & Bowman, J. M. Permutationally invariant potential energy surfaces in high dimensionality. Int. Rev. Phys. Chem. 28, 577–606 (2009).

   Article  Google Scholar 

8. Qu, C., Yu, Q. & Bowman, J. M. Permutationally invariant potential energy surfaces. Annu. Rev. Phys. Chem. 69, 151–175 (2018).

   Article  Google Scholar 

9. Jiang, B. & Guo, H. Permutation invariant polynomial neural network approach to fitting potential energy surfaces. J. Chem. Phys. 139, 054112 (2013).

   Article  Google Scholar 

10. Jiang, B., Li, J. & Guo, H. Potential energy surfaces from high fidelity fitting of ab initio points: the permutation invariant polynomial–neural network approach. Int. Rev. Phys. Chem. 35, 479–506 (2016).

    Article  Google Scholar 

11. Shao, K., Chen, J., Zhao, Z. & Zhang, D. H. Fitting potential energy surfaces with fundamental invariant neural network. J. Chem. Phys. 145, 071101 (2016).

    Article  Google Scholar 

12. Fu, B. & Zhang, D. H. Accurate fundamental invariant-neural network representation of ab initio potential energy surfaces. Natl Sci. Rev. 10, nwad321 (2023).

    Article  Google Scholar 

13. Behler, J. & Parrinello, M. Generalized neural-network representation of high-dimensional potential-energy surfaces. Phys. Rev. Lett. 98, 146401 (2007).

    Article  Google Scholar 

14. Behler, J. Four generations of high-dimensional neural network potentials. Chem. Rev. 121, 10037–10072 (2021).

    Article  Google Scholar 

15. Chmiela, S., Sauceda, H. E., Müller, K.-R. & Tkatchenko, A. Towards exact molecular dynamics simulations with machine-learned force fields. Nat. Commun. 9, 3887 (2018).

    Article  Google Scholar 

16. Bartók, A. P., Payne, M. C., Kondor, R. & Csányi, G. Gaussian approximation potentials: the accuracy of quantum mechanics, without the electrons. Phys. Rev. Lett. 104, 136403 (2010).

    Article  Google Scholar 

17. Uteva, E., Graham, R. S., Wilkinson, R. D. & Wheatley, R. J. Interpolation of intermolecular potentials using Gaussian processes. J. Chem. Phys. 147, 161706 (2017).

    Article  Google Scholar 

18. Schütt, K. T., Sauceda, H. E., Kindermans, P.-J., Tkatchenko, A. & Müller, K.-R. SchNet—a deep learning architecture for molecules and materials. J. Chem. Phys. 148, 241722 (2018).

    Article  Google Scholar 

19. Unke, O. T. & Meuwly, M. PhysNet: a neural network for predicting energies, forces, dipole moments, and partial charges. J. Chem. Theory Comput. 15, 3678–3693 (2019).

    Article  Google Scholar 

20. Zhang, L., Han, J., Wang, H., Car, R. & Weinan, E. Deep potential molecular dynamics: a scalable model with the accuracy of quantum mechanics. Phys. Rev. Lett. 120, 143001 (2018).

    Article  Google Scholar 

21. Zhang, Y., Hu, C. & Jiang, B. Embedded atom neural network potentials: efficient and accurate machine learning with a physically inspired representation. J. Phys. Chem. Lett. 10, 4962–4967 (2019).

    Article  Google Scholar 

22. Batzner, S. et al. E(3)-equivariant graph neural networks for data-efficient and accurate interatomic potentials. Nat. Commun. 13, 2453 (2022).

    Article  Google Scholar 

23. Batatia, I., Kovacs, D. P., Simm, G., Ortner, C. & Csanyi, G. MACE: higher order equivariant message passing neural networks for fast and accurate force fields. Adv. Neural Inf. Process. Syst. 35, 11423–11436 (2022).

    Google Scholar 

24. Musaelian, A. et al. Learning local equivariant representations for large-scale atomistic dynamics. Nat. Commun. 14, 579 (2023).

    Article  Google Scholar 

25. Heidar-Zadeh, F. et al. Information-theoretic approaches to atoms-in-molecules: Hirshfeld family of partitioning schemes. J. Phys. Chem. A. 122, 4219–4245 (2017).

    Article  Google Scholar 

26. Uhlig, F., Tovey, S. & Holm, C. Emergence of accurate atomic energies from machine learned noble gas potentials. Preprint at https://arxiv.org/abs/2403.00377 (2024).

27. Konovalov, A., Symons, B. C. & Popelier, P. L. On the many-body nature of intramolecular forces in FFLUX and its implications. J. Comput. Chem. 42, 107–116 (2021).

    Article  Google Scholar 

28. Symons, B. C. & Popelier, P. L. Application of quantum chemical topology force field FFLUX to condensed matter simulations: liquid water. J. Chem. Theory Comput. 18, 5577–5588 (2022).

    Article  Google Scholar 

29. Manchev, Y. T. & Popelier, P. L. Modeling many-body interactions in water with Gaussian process regression. J. Phys. Chem. A. 128, 9345–9351 (2024).

    Article  Google Scholar 

30. Bader, R. F. W. Atoms in molecules. Acc. Chem. Res. 18, 9–15 (1985).

    Article  Google Scholar 

31. Popelier, P. L. A. The Chemical Bond 271–308 (John Wiley & Sons, 2014).

32. Gordon, M. S., Fedorov, D. G., Pruitt, S. R. & Slipchenko, L. V. Fragmentation methods: a route to accurate calculations on large systems. Chem. Rev. 112, 632–672 (2012).

    Article  Google Scholar 

33. Hodges, M. P., Stone, A. J. & Xantheas, S. S. Contribution of many-body terms to the energy for small water clusters: a comparison of ab initio calculations and accurate model potentials. J. Phys. Chem. A 101, 9163–9168 (1997).

    Article  Google Scholar 

34. Dahlke, E. E. & Truhlar, D. G. Electrostatically embedded many-body correlation energy, with applications to the calculation of accurate second-order Møller–Plesset perturbation theory energies for large water clusters. J. Chem. Theory Comput. 3, 1342–1348 (2007).

    Article  Google Scholar 

35. Wang, Y. M., Shepler, B. C., Braams, B. J. & Bowman, J. M. Full-dimensional, ab initio potential energy and dipole moment surfaces for water. J. Chem. Phys. 131, 054511 (2009).

    Article  Google Scholar 

36. Góra, U., Podeszwa, R., Cencek, W. & Szalewicz, K. Interaction energies of large clusters from many-body expansion. J. Chem. Phys. 135, 224102 (2011).

    Article  Google Scholar 

37. Medders, G. R., Götz, A. W., Morales, M. A., Bajaj, P. & Paesani, F. On the representation of many-body interactions in water. J. Chem. Phys. 143, 104102 (2015).

    Article  Google Scholar 

38. Yu, Q. & Bowman, J. M. VSCF/VCI vibrational spectroscopy of H₇O₃⁺ and H₉O₄⁺ using high-level, many-body potential energy surface and dipole moment surfaces. J. Chem. Phys. 146, 121102 (2017).

    Article  Google Scholar 

39. Heindel, J. P. & Xantheas, S. S. The many-body expansion for aqueous systems revisited: I. Water–water interactions. J. Chem. Theory Comput. 16, 6843–6855 (2020).

    Article  Google Scholar 

40. Zhu, X., Riera, M., Bull-Vulpe, E. F. & Paesani, F. MB-pol(2023): sub-chemical accuracy for water simulations from the gas to the liquid phase. J. Chem. Theory Comput. 19, 3551–3556 (2023).

    Article  Google Scholar 

41. Yu, Q. et al. q-AQUA: a many-body CCSD(T) water potential, including 4-body interactions, demonstrates the quantum nature of water from clusters to the liquid phase. J. Phys. Chem. Lett. 13, 5068–5074 (2022).

    Article  Google Scholar 

42. Qu, C. et al. Interfacing q-AQUA with a polarizable force field: the best of both worlds. J. Chem. Theory Comput. 19, 3446–3459 (2023).

    Article  Google Scholar 

43. Partridge, H. & Schwenke, D. W. The determination of an accurate isotope dependent potential energy surface for water from extensive ab initio calculations and experimental data. J. Chem. Phys. 106, 4618 (1997).

    Article  Google Scholar 

44. Zhu, Y.-C. et al. Torsional tunneling splitting in a water trimer. J. Am. Chem. Soc. 144, 21356–21362 (2022).

    Article  Google Scholar 

45. Fu, B. & Zhang, D. H. Ab initio potential energy surfaces and quantum dynamics for polyatomic bimolecular reactions. J. Chem. Theory Comput. 14, 2289–2303 (2018).

    Article  Google Scholar 

46. Cheng, B., Engel, E. A., Behler, J., Dellago, C. & Ceriotti, M. Ab initio thermodynamics of liquid and solid water. Proc. Natl Acad. Sci. USA 116, 1110–1115 (2019).

    Article  Google Scholar 

47. Zhang, Y., Xia, J. & Jiang, B. REANN: a PyTorch-based end-to-end multi-functional deep neural network package for molecular, reactive, and periodic systems. J. Chem. Phys. 156, 114801 (2022).

    Article  Google Scholar 

48. Zhai, Y., Caruso, A., Bore, S. L., Luo, Z. & Paesani, F. A ‘short blanket’ dilemma for a state-of-the-art neural network potential for water: reproducing experimental properties or the physics of the underlying many-body interactions? J. Chem. Phys. 158, 084111 (2023).

    Article  Google Scholar 

49. Medders, G. R., Babin, V. & Paesani, F. Development of a ‘first-principles’ water potential with flexible monomers. III. Liquid phase properties. J. Chem. Theory Comput. 10, 2906–2910 (2014).

    Article  Google Scholar 

50. Kapil, V. et al. i-PI 2.0: a universal force engine for advanced molecular simulations. Comput. Phys. Commun. 236, 214–223 (2019).

    Article  Google Scholar 

51. Reddy, S. K. et al. On the accuracy of the MB-pol many-body potential for water: interaction energies, vibrational frequencies, and classical thermodynamic and dynamical properties from clusters to liquid water and ice. J. Chem. Phys. 145, 194504 (2016).

    Article  Google Scholar 

52. Houston, P. L. et al. No headache for PIPs: a PIP potential for aspirin runs much faster and with similar precision than other machine-learned potentials. J. Chem. Theory Comput. 20, 3008–3018 (2024).

    Article  Google Scholar 

53. Habershon, S., Markland, T. E. & Manolopoulos, D. E. Competing quantum effects in the dynamics of a flexible water model. J. Chem. Phys. 131, 024501 (2009).

    Article  Google Scholar 

54. Fanourgakis, G. S. & Xantheas, S. S. Development of transferable interaction potentials for water. V. Extension of the flexible, polarizable, Thole-type model potential (TTM3-F, v. 3.0) to describe the vibrational spectra of water clusters and liquid water. J. Chem. Phys. 128, 074506 (2008).

    Article  Google Scholar 

55. Cheng, B. Cartesian atomic cluster expansion for machine learning interatomic potentials. npj Comput. Mater. 10, 157 (2024).

    Article  Google Scholar 

56. Conte, R., Qu, C. & Bowman, J. M. Permutationally invariant fitting of many-body, non-covalent interactions with application to three-body methane–water–water. J. Chem. Theory Comput. 11, 1631–1638 (2015).

    Article  Google Scholar 

57. Mathur, R., Muniz, M. C., Yue, S., Car, R. & Panagiotopoulos, A. Z. First-principles-based machine learning models for phase behavior and transport properties of CO₂. J. Phys. Chem. B 127, 4562–4569 (2023).

    Article  Google Scholar 

58. Houston, P. L. et al. PESPIP: software to fit complex molecular and many-body potential energy surfaces with permutationally invariant polynomials. J. Chem. Phys. 158, 044109 (2023).

    Article  Google Scholar 

59. Chen, R., Shao, K., Fu, B. & Zhang, D. H. Fitting potential energy surfaces with fundamental invariant neural network. II. Generating fundamental invariants for molecular systems with up to ten atoms. J. Chem. Phys. 152, 204307 (2020).

    Article  Google Scholar 

60. Gilmer, J., Schoenholz, S. S., Riley, P. F., Vinyals, O. & Dahl, G. E. Neural message passing for quantum chemistry. In International Conference on Machine Learning (eds. Precup, D. & Teh, Y. W.) 1263–1272 (PMLR, 2017).

61. Schütt, K. T., Arbabzadah, F., Chmiela, S., Müller, K. R. & Tkatchenko, A. Quantum-chemical insights from deep tensor neural networks. Nat. Commun. 8, 13890 (2017).

    Article  Google Scholar 

62. Qu, C. & Bowman, J. M. Communication: a fragmented, permutationally invariant polynomial approach for potential energy surfaces of large molecules: application to N-methyl acetamide. J. Chem. Phys. 150, 141101 (2019).

    Article  Google Scholar 

63. Moré, J. J. The Levenberg–Marquardt algorithm: implementation and theory. In Numerical Analysis: Proc. Biennial Conference held at Dundee, June 28–July 1, 1977 (ed. Watson, G. A.) 105–116 (Springer Berlin Heidelberg, 2006).

64. Anderson, J. B. A random-walk simulation of the Schrödinger equation: \({{{\mathrm{H}}}_{{3}}^{+}}\). J. Chem. Phys. 63, 1499–1503 (1975).

    Article  Google Scholar 

65. Yu, Q. et al. Data files for developing and testing MB-PIPNet models on water trimer, methane-water cluster, and liquid water. figshare https://doi.org/10.6084/m9.figshare.28510238.v1 (2025).

66. Yu, Q. Source code and example of MB-PIPNet approach. Zenodo https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.14954863 (2025).

67. Wang, Y. & Bowman, J. M. Rigorous calculation of dissociation energies (D) of the water trimer, (H₂O)₃ and (D₂O)₃. J. Chem. Phys. 135, 131101 (2011).

    Article  Google Scholar 

68. Zhang, Y., Hu, C. & Jiang, B. Accelerating atomistic simulations with piecewise machine-learned ab initio potentials at a classical force field-like cost. Phys. Chem. Chem. Phys. 23, 1815–1821 (2021).

    Article  Google Scholar 

69. Kovács, D. P., Batatia, I., Arany, E. S. & Csányi, G. Evaluation of the MACE force field architecture: from medicinal chemistry to materials science. J. Chem. Phys. 159, 044118 (2023).

    Article  Google Scholar 

70. Mills, R. Self-diffusion in normal and heavy water in the range 1–45°. J. Phys. Chem. 77, 685–688 (1973).

    Article  Google Scholar 

71. Holz, M., Heil, S. R. & Sacco, A. Temperature-dependent self-diffusion coefficients of water and six selected molecular liquids for calibration in accurate ¹H NMR PFG measurements. Phys. Chem. Chem. Phys. 2, 4740–4742 (2000).

    Article  Google Scholar 

72. Skinner, L. B. et al. Benchmark oxygen–oxygen pair-distribution function of ambient water from X-ray diffraction measurements with a wide Q-range. J. Chem. Phys. 138, 074506 (2013).

    Article  Google Scholar 

73. Skinner, L. B., Benmore, C. J., Neuefeind, J. C. & Parise, J. B. The structure of water around the compressibility minimum. J. Chem. Phys. 141, 214507 (2014).

    Article  Google Scholar 

74. Soper, A. & Benmore, C. Quantum differences between heavy and light water. Phys. Rev. Lett. 101, 065502 (2008).

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references