arXiv:2610.19630v1 Announce Type: cross
Abstract: Automated materials discovery requires evaluating large pools of candidate configurations, with density functional theory (DFT) as a major throughput...
By Kun Ryu, Yeo Jin Jung, Shyue Ping Ong, Claire Donnat, Ying Shirley Meng
Automated materials discovery requires evaluating large pools of candidate configurations, with density functional theory (DFT) as a major throughput bottleneck. Pretrained machine-learned interatomic...
arXiv:2510.19251v2 Announce Type: replace-cross
Abstract: Predicting which hypothetical inorganic crystals can be experimentally realized remains a central challenge in accelerating materials discove...
By Danial Ebrahimzadeh, Sarah Sharif, Yaser Mike Banad
arXiv:2508. 05762v2 Announce Type: replace-cross Abstract: Universal machine learning force fields (UMLFFs) promise to revolutionize materials science by enabling rapid atomistic simulations across the periodic table.
By Sajid Mannan, Vaibhav Bihani, Carmelo Gonzales, Kin Long Kelvin Lee, Nitya Nand Gosvami, Sayan Ranu, Santiago Miret, N M Anoop Krishnan
Machine-learned interatomic potentials (MLIPs) excel at in-distribution tasks, accelerating drug and material development, yet they struggle to generalize out-of-distribution. We propose to push the c...
The paper proposes pre-training uncertainty estimators on large, diverse materials science datasets to improve uncertainty quantification (UQ) for machine‑learned interatomic potentials (MLIPs). By evaluating these pre‑trained models on both in‑distribution and out‑of‑domain adsorption‑energy predictions, the authors demonstrate that zero‑shot UQ is viable and that fine‑tuning yields strong correlations between predicted uncertainty and actual prediction error, even on challenging datasets. This approach aims to provide foundational UQ models that enable broader, more reliable deployment of MLIPs across chemical space.
By Stefan P. Schmid, Tobias Setzer, Maximilian Scheurer
The paper presents a hierarchical deep‑learning framework that integrates compositional, structural, and transport models to screen solid‑state electrolytes. Four modules—L‑G‑DCNN, DenseGNN, MatterSim, and DeePMD—coordinate to evaluate thermodynamics, multi‑property performance, and kinetic transport, outperforming existing methods. Applied to over 30 million candidates, the workflow identifies 97 high‑performance materials, mainly halides, and links Li⁺ jump‑network connectivity to ionic conductivity while highlighting limits for oxide electrolytes.
By Hongwei Du, Dingyang Lv, Baole Wei, Yongheng Li, Feng Yu, Ziheng Lu, Siqi Shi, Hong Wang
The paper introduces Physics‑Aligned Electronic Ground‑State Models (GSMs) that sit between machine‑learned interatomic potentials and Kohn‑Sham density functional theory in terms of computational cost and accuracy. By aligning GSM learning objectives with KS‑DFT equations and enforcing physical constraints, the authors develop new training techniques—OrthoNormal‑Loss (ON‑Loss), Grassmann Restricted Occupied‑Orbital Training (GROOT), and Residual Optimal‑gauge Conditioning‑aware KS‑Eq. Training (ROCKET)—which dramatically reduce energy and force errors in size‑extrapolation tests from QM9 to QM40. The models also achieve near‑chemical‑accuracy predictions on reactive chemistry benchmarks and demonstrate efficient label‑free self‑consistency fine‑tuning.
whyItMatters":"The work advances the cost‑accuracy frontier for electronic structure predictions, enabling more reliable out‑of‑distribution generalization in drug and material discovery."
By Eike S. Eberhard, Xaver Kainz, Viktor Kotsev, Abdulrahman Aldossary, Stephan G\"unnemann
The paper introduces UniTB, a universal, E(3)-equivariant Hamiltonian framework that blends density‑functional tight‑binding priors with deep learning to predict electronic structures efficiently. UniTB corrects a prior Hamiltonian via a mixture‑of‑experts network and a charge‑equilibration head, ensuring physical downstream properties and suppressing spurious states. Trained on over 29,000 crystals, UniTB achieves sub‑meV accuracy, matches DFT predictions for amorphous Ge‑Sb‑Te, and enables rapid screening of more than 16,000 materials for industrial applications.
By Mingkang Liu, Zhanghao Zhouyin, Guanghui Wang, Daye Zheng, Lei Shen, Qiangqiang Gu
arXiv:2607. 14486v1 Announce Type: cross Abstract: Machine-learning force fields (MLFFs) are reliable only near their training distribution, making efficient construction of diverse training sets a major bottleneck for both train-from-scratch and foundation fine-tuning workflows.
By Sheng Bi, Yi-Ze Wang, Jun Cheng
arXiv:2606. 15001v1 Announce Type: cross Abstract: Foundation machine learning interatomic potentials (MLIPs) have enabled atomistic simulations across broad regions of chemical and materials space, but many remain computationally expensive and lack explicit electrostatics, limiting their use for systems governed by long-range interactions and electrical response.
By Xiaoyu Wang, Bingqing Cheng
arXiv:2606. 08148v1 Announce Type: cross Abstract: Interatomic potentials (IPs) enable large-scale atomistic simulations beyond the reach of first-principles methods, but their predictive reliability depends critically on the selection of training data, quantified uncertainty, and model expressiveness.
By Yonatan Kurniawan (Department of Physics and Astronomy, Brigham Young University, Provo, UT, USA), Logan D. Williams (Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory, Livermore, CA, USA), Amit Samanta (Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory, Livermore, CA, USA), Ilia Nikiforov (Department of Aerospace Engineering and Mechanics, University of Minnesota, Minneapolis, MN, USA), Daniel Schwalbe-Koda (Department of Materials Science and Engineering, University of California, Los Angeles, CA, USA), Mark K. Transtrum (Cross Stream Consulting, Springville, UT, USA), Ellad B. Tadmor (Department of Aerospace Engineering and Mechanics, University of Minnesota, Minneapolis, MN, USA), Vincenzo Lordi (Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory, Livermore, CA, USA), Vasily V. Bulatov (Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory, Livermore, CA, USA)