BZPEERReading, trust and collaboration for research
Menu

Discover

GraphFollow connections around a paper, topic or saved view.

Workspaces

HomePick up where your research flow left off.InboxHandle requests, replies and notifications from one place.CollectionsCurate reading lists, evidence sets and shareable dossiers.ResearchSee your private provenance graph, trail and imports.CollaborationMove from discovery into focused discussion rooms.PublishDraft, preview and publish full-text research articles.

Network

ExpertsFind specialists worth following or asking for help.CommunitiesJoin research circles organized around shared work.PartnersSee external organizations active around the same topics.

Opportunities

ListingsBrowse roles, calls and collaborations with clearer fit signals.

Account

Log inReturn to your reading and collaboration workspace.Create accountStart saving work, following people and joining teams.
Log inCreate account

Researcher profile

Anders S. Christensen

Anders S. Christensen contributes to research discovery and scholarly infrastructure.

ResearcherAffiliation not importedOpen to collaborate
physics.chem-phphysics.comp-phcond-mat.mtrl-sci

Trust snapshot

Quick read

Trust 15 - UnverifiedVerification L1Unclaimed author
3works
0followers
3topics
4close collaborators

Actions

Decide how to stay connected

Follow researcher0

Identity and collaboration

How to connect with this researcher

Claiming links this public author record to a researcher profile and unlocks direct collaboration workflows.

Log in to claim

Direct collaboration

Open a focused conversation when the fit is right

Claim this author entity first to unlock direct invitations.

Research graph

See the researcher in context

Open full explorer

Inspect adjacent work, topics, institutions and collaborators without jumping out to a separate graph page.

Building this graph slice

BZPEER is loading the nearby papers, people, topics and institutions for this page.

Published work

3 published item(s)

preprint2020arXiv

An assessment of the structural resolution of various fingerprints commonly used in machine learning

Atomic environment fingerprints are widely used in computational materials science, from machine learning potentials to the quantification of similarities between atomic configurations. Many approaches to the construction of such fingerprints, also called structural descriptors, have been proposed. In this work, we compare the performance of fingerprints based on the Overlap Matrix(OM), the Smooth Overlap of Atomic Positions (SOAP), Behler-Parrinello atom-centered symmetry functions (ACSF), modified Behler-Parrinello symmetry functions (MBSF) used in the ANI-1ccx potential and the Faber-Christensen-Huang-Lilienfeld (FCHL) fingerprint under various aspects. We study their ability to resolve differences in local environments and in particular examine whether there are certain atomic movements that leave the fingerprints exactly or nearly invariant. For this purpose, we introduce a sensitivity matrix whose eigenvalues quantify the effect of atomic displacement modes on the fingerprint. Further, we check whether these displacements correlate with the variation of localized physical quantities such as forces. Finally, we extend our examination to the correlation between molecular fingerprints obtained from the atomic fingerprints and global quantities of entire molecules.

0 citations0 reviewsNo code linkedOpen access
preprint2020arXiv

FCHL revisited: faster and more accurate quantum machine learning

We introduce the FCHL19 representation for atomic environments in molecules or condensed-phase systems. Machine learning models based on FCHL19 are able to yield predictions of atomic forces and energies of query compounds with chemical accuracy on the scale of milliseconds. FCHL19 is a revision of our previous work [Faber et al. 2018] where the representation is discretized and the individual features are rigorously optimized using Monte Carlo optimization. Combined with a Gaussian kernel function that incorporates elemental screening, chemical accuracy is reached for energy learning on the QM7b and QM9 datasets after training for minutes and hours, respectively. The model also shows good performance for non-bonded interactions in the condensed phase for a set of water clusters with an MAE binding energy error of less than 0.1 kcal/mol/molecule after training on 3,200 samples. For force learning on the MD17 dataset, our optimized model similarly displays state-of-the-art accuracy with a regressor based on Gaussian process regression. When the revised FCHL19 representation is combined with the operator quantum machine learning regressor, forces and energies can be predicted in only a few milliseconds per atom. The model presented herein is fast and lightweight enough for use in general chemistry problems as well as molecular dynamics simulations.

0 citations0 reviewsNo code linkedOpen access
preprint2020arXiv

On the role of gradients for machine learning of molecular energies and forces

The accuracy of any machine learning potential can only be as good as the data used in the fitting process. The most efficient model therefore selects the training data that will yield the highest accuracy compared to the cost of obtaining the training data. We investigate the convergence of prediction errors of quantum machine learning models for organic molecules trained on energy and force labels, two common data types in molecular simulations. When training and predicting on different geometries corresponding to the same single molecule, we find that the inclusion of atomic forces in the training data increases the accuracy of the predicted energies and forces 7-fold, compared to models trained on energy only. Surprisingly, for models trained on sets of organic molecules of varying size and composition in non-equilibrium conformations, inclusion of forces in the training does not improve the predicted energies of unseen molecules in new conformations. Predicted forces, however, also improve about 7-fold. For the systems studied, we find that force labels and energy labels contribute equally per label to the convergence of the prediction errors. Choosing to include derivatives such as atomic forces in the training set or not should thus depend on, not only on the computational cost of acquiring the force labels for training, but also on the application domain, the property of interest, and the desirable size of the machine learning model. Based on our observations we describe key considerations for the creation of datasets for potential energy surfaces of molecules which maximize the efficiency of the resulting machine learning models.

0 citations0 reviewsNo code linkedOpen access