ResearchTrend.AI
  • Papers
  • Communities
  • Events
  • Blog
  • Pricing
Papers
Communities
Social Events
Terms and Conditions
Pricing
Parameter LabParameter LabTwitterGitHubLinkedInBlueskyYoutube

© 2025 ResearchTrend.AI, All rights reserved.

  1. Home
  2. Papers
  3. 2410.11392
16
0

Investigating Data Hierarchies in Multifidelity Machine Learning for Excitation Energies

15 October 2024
Vivin Vinod
Peter Zaspel
ArXivPDFHTML
Abstract

Recent progress in machine learning (ML) has made high-accuracy quantum chemistry (QC) calculations more accessible. Of particular interest are multifidelity machine learning (MFML) methods where training data from differing accuracies or fidelities are used. These methods usually employ a fixed scaling factor, γ\gammaγ, to relate the number of training samples across different fidelities, which reflects the cost and assumed sparsity of the data. This study investigates the impact of modifying γ\gammaγ on model efficiency and accuracy for the prediction of vertical excitation energies using the QeMFi benchmark dataset. Further, this work introduces QC compute time informed scaling factors, denoted as θ\thetaθ, that vary based on QC compute times at different fidelities. A novel error metric, error contours of MFML, is proposed to provide a comprehensive view of model error contributions from each fidelity. The results indicate that high model accuracy can be achieved with just 2 training samples at the target fidelity when a larger number of samples from lower fidelities are used. This is further illustrated through a novel concept, the Γ\GammaΓ-curve, which compares model error against the time-cost of generating training samples, demonstrating that multifidelity models can achieve high accuracy while minimizing training data costs.

View on arXiv
@article{vinod2025_2410.11392,
  title={ Investigating Data Hierarchies in Multifidelity Machine Learning for Excitation Energies },
  author={ Vivin Vinod and Peter Zaspel },
  journal={arXiv preprint arXiv:2410.11392},
  year={ 2025 }
}
Comments on this paper