Artificial intelligence-enhanced quantum mechanical method 1 (AIQM1) is a general-purpose method that was shown to achieve high accuracy for many applications with a speed close to its baseline semiempirical quantum mechanical (SQM) method ODM2*. Here, we evaluate the hitherto unknown performance of out-of-the-box AIQM1 without any refitting for reaction barrier heights on eight datasets, including a total of ∼24 thousand reactions. This evaluation shows that AIQM1’s accuracy strongly depends on the type of transition state and ranges from excellent for rotation barriers to poor for, e.g., pericyclic reactions. AIQM1 clearly outperforms its baseline ODM2* method and, even more so, a popular universal potential, ANI-1ccx. Overall, however, AIQM1 accuracy largely remains similar to SQM methods (and B3LYP/6-31G* for most reaction types) suggesting that it is desirable to focus on improving AIQM1 performance for barrier heights in the future. We also show that the built-in uncertainty quantification helps in identifying confident predictions. The accuracy of confident AIQM1 predictions is approaching the level of popular density functional theory methods for most reaction types. Encouragingly, AIQM1 is rather robust for transition state optimizations, even for the type of reactions it struggles with the most. Single-point calculations with high-level methods on AIQM1-optimized geometries can be used to significantly improve barrier heights, which cannot be said for its baseline ODM2* method.
REFERENCES
1.
W. H.
Green
, “Moving from postdictive to predictive kinetics in reaction engineering
,” AIChE J.
66
, e17059
(2020
).2.
P. O.
Dral
and J.
Řezáč
, in Quantum Chemistry in the Age of Machine Learning
, edited by P. O.
Dral
(Elsevier
, Amsterdam, Netherlands
, 2023
).3.
T.
Husch
, A. C.
Vaucher
, and M.
Reiher
, “Semiempirical molecular orbital models based on the neglect of diatomic differential overlap approximation
,” Int. J. Quantum Chem.
118
, e25799
(2018
).4.
A. S.
Christensen
, T.
Kubař
, Q.
Cui
, and M.
Elstner
, “Semiempirical quantum mechanical methods for noncovalent interactions for chemical and biochemical applications
,” Chem. Rev.
116
, 5301
–5337
(2016
).5.
M.
Korth
and W.
Thiel
, “Benchmarking semiempirical methods for thermochemistry, kinetics, and noncovalent interactions: OMx methods are almost as accurate and robust as DFT-GGA methods for organic molecules
,” J. Chem. Theory Comput.
7
, 2929
–2936
(2011
).6.
P. O.
Dral
, X.
Wu
, L.
Spörkel
, A.
Koslowski
, and W.
Thiel
, “Semiempirical quantum-chemical orthogonalization-corrected methods: Benchmarks for ground-state properties
,” J. Chem. Theory Comput.
12
, 1097
–1120
(2016
).7.
P. O.
Dral
, X.
Wu
, and W.
Thiel
, “Semiempirical quantum-chemical methods with orthogonalization and dispersion corrections
,” J. Chem. Theory Comput.
15
, 1743
–1760
(2019
).8.
C.
Bannwarth
, S.
Ehlert
, and S.
Grimme
, “GFN2-xTB—An accurate and broadly parametrized self-consistent tight-binding quantum chemical method with multipole electrostatics and density-dependent dispersion contributions
,” J. Chem. Theory Comput.
15
, 1652
–1671
(2019
).9.
T.
Clark
and J. J. P.
Stewart
, in Computational Methods for Large Systems: Electronic Structure Approaches for Biotechnology and Nanotechnology
, edited by J. R.
Reimers
(John Wiley and Sons, Inc.
, Chichester
, 2011
), pp. 259
–286
.10.
N.
Lima
, G.
Rocha
, R.
Freire
, and A.
Simas
, “RM1 semiempirical model: Chemistry, pharmaceutical research, molecular biology and materials science
,” J. Braz. Chem. Soc.
30
, 683
–716
(2018
).11.
M. H.
Rasmussen
and J. H.
Jensen
, “Fast and automatic estimation of transition state structures using tight binding quantum chemical calculations
,” PeerJ Phys. Chem.
2
, e15
(2020
).12.
J. C.
Kromann
, A. S.
Christensen
, Q.
Cui
, and J. H.
Jensen
, “Towards a barrier height benchmark set for biologically relevant systems
,” PeerJ
4
, e1994
(2016
).13.
J. J. P.
Stewart
, “Optimization of parameters for semiempirical methods VI: More modifications to the NDDO approximations and re-optimization of parameters
,” J. Mol. Model.
19
, 1
–32
(2013
).14.
M.
Koerstz
, M. H.
Rasmussen
, and J. H.
Jensen
, “Fast and automated identification of reactions with low barriers: The decomposition of 3-hydroperoxypropanal
,” SciPost Chem.
1
, 003
(2021
).15.
M. P.
Haag
, A. C.
Vaucher
, M.
Bosson
, S.
Redon
, and M.
Reiher
, “Interactive chemical reactivity exploration
,” ChemPhysChem
15
, 3301
–3319
(2014
).16.
K.
Matsubara
, L.-C.
Chou
, H.
Amii
, and R.
Kakuchi
, “Fast-track computational access to reaction mechanisms provides comprehensive insights into aminolysis postpolymerization modification reactions
,” Mol. Syst. Des. Eng.
7
, 1263
–1276
(2022
).17.
D.
Kuntz
and A. K.
Wilson
, “Machine learning, artificial intelligence, and chemistry: How smart algorithms are reshaping simulation and the laboratory
,” Pure Appl. Chem.
94
, 1019
–1054
(2022
).18.
K. T.
Butler
, D. W.
Davies
, H.
Cartwright
, O.
Isayev
, and A.
Walsh
, “Machine learning for molecular and materials science
,” Nature
559
, 547
–555
(2018
).19.
O. A.
von Lilienfeld
, K.-R.
Müller
, and A.
Tkatchenko
, “Exploring chemical compound space with quantum-based machine learning
,” Nat. Rev. Chem.
4
, 347
–358
(2020
).20.
S.
Manzhos
, “Machine learning for the solution of the Schrödinger equation
,” Mach. Learn.: Sci. Technol.
1
, 013002
(2020
).21.
P. O.
Dral
, “Quantum chemistry in the age of machine learning
,” J. Phys. Chem. Lett.
11
, 2336
–2347
(2020
).22.
J.
Zhang
, Y.-K.
Lei
, Z.
Zhang
, J.
Chang
, M.
Li
, X.
Han
, L.
Yang
, Y. I.
Yang
, and Y. Q.
Gao
, “A perspective on deep learning for molecular modeling and simulations
,” J. Phys. Chem. A
124
, 6745
–6763
(2020
).23.
J.
Westermayr
, M.
Gastegger
, K. T.
Schütt
, and R. J.
Maurer
, “Perspective on integrating machine learning into computational chemistry and materials science
,” J. Chem. Phys.
154
, 230903
(2021
).24.
T.
Mueller
, A.
Hernandez
, and C.
Wang
, “Machine learning for interatomic potential models
,” J. Chem. Phys.
152
, 050902
(2020
).25.
Z. J.
Baum
, X.
Yu
, P. Y.
Ayala
, Y.
Zhao
, S. P.
Watkins
, and Q.
Zhou
, “Artificial intelligence in chemistry: Current trends and future directions
,” J. Chem. Inf. Model.
61
, 3197
–3212
(2021
).26.
T.
Zubatiuk
and O.
Isayev
, “Development of multimodal machine learning potentials: Toward a physics-aware artificial intelligence
,” Acc. Chem. Res.
54
, 1575
–1585
(2021
).27.
K. T.
Schütt
, S.
Chmiela
, O. A.
von Lilienfeld
, A.
Tkatchenko
, K.
Tsuda
, and K.-R.
Müller
, Machine Learning Meets Quantum Physics
(Springer
, Cham
, 2020
).28.
P. O.
Dral
, Quantum Chemistry in the Age of Machine Learning
(Elsevier
, Amsterdam, Netherlands
, 2023
).29.
V. L.
Deringer
, A. P.
Bartók
, N.
Bernstein
, D. M.
Wilkins
, M.
Ceriotti
, and G.
Csányi
, “Gaussian process regression for materials and molecules
,” Chem. Rev.
121
, 10073
–10141
(2021
).30.
J.
Behler
, “Four generations of high-dimensional neural network potentials
,” Chem. Rev.
121
, 10037
–10072
(2021
).31.
K. A.
Spiekermann
, L.
Pattanaik
, and W. H.
Green
, “Fast predictions of reaction barrier heights: Toward coupled-cluster accuracy
,” J. Phys. Chem. A
126
, 3976
–3986
(2022
).32.
T.
Lewis-Atwell
, P. A.
Townsend
, and M. N.
Grayson
, “Machine learning activation energies of chemical reactions
,” Wiley Interdiscip. Rev.: Comput. Mol. Sci.
12
, e1593
(2022
).33.
X.
García-Andrade
, P. G.
Tahoces
, J.
Pérez-Ríos
, and E. M.
Núñez
, “Barrier height prediction by machine learning correction of semiempirical calculations
,” arXiv:2208.02289v1 [physics.chem-ph] (2022
).34.
S.
Vargas
, M. R.
Hennefarth
, Z.
Liu
, and A. N.
Alexandrova
, “Machine learning to predict Diels–Alder reaction barriers from the reactant state electron density
,” J. Chem. Theory Comput.
17
, 6203
–6213
(2021
).35.
I.
Ismail
, C.
Robertson
, and S.
Habershon
, “Successes and challenges in using machine-learned activation energies in kinetic simulations
,” J. Chem. Phys.
157
, 014109
(2022
).36.
F.
Palazzesi
, M. R.
Hermann
, M. A.
Grundl
, A.
Pautsch
, D.
Seeliger
, C. S.
Tautermann
, and A.
Weber
, “BIreactive: A machine-learning model to estimate covalent warhead reactivity
,” J. Chem. Inf. Model.
60
, 2915
–2923
(2020
).37.
C. A.
Grambow
, L.
Pattanaik
, and W. H.
Green
, “Deep learning of activation energies
,” J. Phys. Chem. Lett.
11
, 2992
–2997
(2020
).38.
P.
Friederich
, G.
dos Passos Gomes
, R.
De Bin
, A.
Aspuru-Guzik
, and D.
Balcells
, “Machine learning dihydrogen activation in the chemical space surrounding Vaska’s complex
,” Chem. Sci.
11
, 4584
–4601
(2020
).39.
T.
Bucko
, M.
Gesvandtnerova
, and D.
Rocca
, “Ab initio calculations of free energy of activation at multiple electronic structure levels made affordable: An effective combination of perturbation theory and machine learning
,” J. Chem. Theory Comput.
16
, 6049
–6060
(2020
).40.
M.
Bragato
, G. F.
von Rudorff
, and O. A.
von Lilienfeld
, “Data enhanced Hammett-equation: Reaction barriers in chemical space
,” Chem. Sci.
11
, 11859
–11868
(2020
).41.
J.
Xu
, X.-M.
Cao
, and P.
Hu
, “Improved prediction for the methane activation mechanism on rutile metal oxides by a machine learning model with geometrical descriptors
,” J. Phys. Chem. C
123
, 28802
–28810
(2019
).42.
B.
von der Esch
, J. C. B.
Dietschreit
, L. D. M.
Peters
, and C.
Ochsenfeld
, “Finding reactive configurations: A machine learning approach for estimating energy barriers applied to sirtuin 5
,” J. Chem. Theory Comput.
15
, 6660
–6667
(2019
).43.
A. R.
Singh
, B. A.
Rohr
, J. A.
Gauthier
, and J. K.
Norskov
, “Predicting chemical reaction barriers with a machine learning model
,” Catal. Lett.
149
, 234
–2354
(2019
).44.
M.
Glavatskikh
, T.
Madzhidov
, D.
Horvath
, R.
Nugmanov
, T.
Gimadiev
, D.
Malakhova
, G.
Marcou
, and A.
Varnek
, “Predictive models for kinetic parameters of cycloaddition reactions
,” Mol. Inf.
38
, e1800077
(2019
).45.
K.
Takahashi
and I.
Miyazato
, “Rapid estimation of activation energy in heterogeneous catalytic reactions via machine learning
,” J. Comput. Chem.
39
, 2405
–2408
(2018
).46.
S.
Choi
, Y.
Kim
, J. W.
Kim
, Z.
Kim
, and W. Y.
Kim
, “Feasibility of activation energy prediction of gas-phase reactions by machine learning
,” Chem. Eur. J.
24
, 12354
–12358
(2018
).47.
E.
Komp
and S.
Valleau
, “Machine learning quantum reaction rate constants
,” J. Phys. Chem. A
124
, 8607
–8613
(2020
).48.
P. L.
Houston
, A.
Nandi
, and J. M.
Bowman
, “A machine learning approach for prediction of rate constants
,” J. Phys. Chem. Lett.
10
, 5250
–5258
(2019
).49.
T.
Gimadiev
, T.
Madzhidov
, I.
Tetko
, R.
Nugmanov
, I.
Casciuc
, O.
Klimchuk
, A.
Bodrov
, P.
Polishchuk
, I.
Antipin
, and A.
Varnek
, “Bimolecular nucleophilic substitution reactions: Predictive models for rate constants and molecular reaction pairs analysis
,” Mol. Inf.
38
, e1800104
(2019
).50.
T. I.
Madzhidov
, A. V.
Bodrov
, T. R.
Gimadiev
, R. I.
Nugmanov
, I. S.
Antipin
, and A. A.
Varnek
, “Structure–reactivity relationship in bimolecular elimination reactions based on the condensed graph of a reaction
,” J. Struct. Chem.
56
, 1227
–1234
(2015
).51.
T.
Stuyver
and C. W.
Coley
, “Quantum chemistry-augmented neural networks for reactivity prediction: Performance, generalizability and explainability
,” J. Chem. Phys.
156
, 084104
(2022
).52.
F.
Sandfort
, F.
Strieth-Kalthoff
, M.
Kühnemund
, C.
Beecks
, and F.
Glorius
, “A structure-based platform for predicting chemical reactivity
,” Chem
6
, 1379
–1390
(2020
).53.
J. A.
Kammeraad
, J.
Goetz
, E. A.
Walker
, A.
Tewari
, and P. M.
Zimmerman
, “What does the machine learn? Knowledge representations of chemical reactivity
,” J. Chem. Inf. Model.
60
, 1290
–1301
(2020
).54.
P.
Schwaller
, A. C.
Vaucher
, T.
Laino
, and J.-L.
Reymond
, “Prediction of chemical reaction yields using deep learning
,” Mach. Learn.: Sci. Technol.
2
, 015016
(2021
).55.
E.
Shim
, J. A.
Kammeraad
, Z.
Xu
, A.
Tewari
, T.
Cernak
, and P. M.
Zimmerman
, “Predicting reaction conditions from limited data through active transfer learning
,” Chem. Sci.
13
, 6655
–6668
(2022
).56.
S.
Hu
and W.-X.
Li
, “Sabatier principle of metal-support interaction for design of ultrastable metal nanocatalysts
,” Science
374
, 1360
–1365
(2021
).57.
M.
Kondo
, H. D. P.
Wathsala
, M. S. H.
Salem
, K.
Ishikawa
, S.
Hara
, T.
Takaai
, T.
Washio
, H.
Sasai
, and S.
Takizawa
, “Bayesian optimization-driven parallel-screening of multiple parameters for the flow synthesis of biaryl compounds
,” Commun. Chem.
5
, 148
(2022
).58.
E.
Walker
, J.
Kammeraad
, J.
Goetz
, M. T.
Robo
, A.
Tewari
, and P. M.
Zimmerman
, “Learning to predict reaction conditions: Relationships between solvent, molecular structure, and catalyst
,” J. Chem. Inf. Model.
59
, 3645
–3654
(2019
).59.
H.
Gao
, T. J.
Struble
, C. W.
Coley
, Y.
Wang
, W. H.
Green
, and K. F.
Jensen
, “Using machine learning to predict suitable conditions for organic reactions
,” ACS Cent. Sci.
4
, 1465
–1476
(2018
).60.
G.
Marcou
, J.
Aires de Sousa
, D. A. R. S.
Latino
, A.
de Luca
, D.
Horvath
, V.
Rietsch
, and A.
Varnek
, “Expert system for predicting reaction conditions: The Michael reaction case
,” J. Chem. Inf. Model.
55
, 239
–250
(2015
).61.
B.
Meyer
, B.
Sawatlon
, S.
Heinen
, O. A.
von Lilienfeld
, and C.
Corminboeuf
, “Machine learning meets volcano plots: Computational discovery of cross-coupling catalysts
,” Chem. Sci.
9
, 7069
–7077
(2018
).62.
J.
Chen
, T.
Jin
, Y.
Jiang
, T.
Shen
, M.
Yang
, and Z.-N.
Chen
, “Toward accurate and efficient dynamic computational strategy for heterogeneous catalysis: Temperature-dependent thermodynamics and kinetics for the chemisorbed on-surface CO
,” Chin. Chem. Lett.
33
, 4936
–4942
(2022
).63.
D. T.
Ahneman
, J. G.
Estrada
, S.
Lin
, S. D.
Dreher
, and A. G.
Doyle
, “Predicting reaction performance in C–N cross-coupling using machine learning
,” Science
360
, 186
–190
(2018
).64.
S. M.
Maley
, D.-H.
Kwon
, N.
Rollins
, J. C.
Stanley
, O. L.
Sydora
, S. M.
Bischof
, and D. H.
Ess
, “Quantum-mechanical transition-state model combined with machine learning provides catalyst design features for selective Cr olefin oligomerization
,” Chem. Sci.
11
, 9665
–9674
(2020
).65.
Z.
Lu
, Z. W.
Chen
, and C. V.
Singh
, “Neural network-assisted development of high-entropy alloy catalysts: Decoupling ligand and coordination effects
,” Matter
3
, 1318
–1333
(2020
).66.
N.
Artrith
, Z.
Lin
, and J. G.
Chen
, “Predicting the activity and selectivity of bimetallic metal catalysts for ethanol reforming using machine learning
,” ACS Catal.
10
, 9438
–9444
(2020
).67.
A. F.
Zahrt
, J. J.
Henle
, B. T.
Rose
, Y.
Wang
, W. T.
Darrow
, and S. E.
Denmark
, “Prediction of higher-selectivity catalysts by computer-driven workflow and machine learning
,” Science
363
, eaau5631
(2019
).68.
J. P.
Reid
and M. S.
Sigman
, “Comparing quantitative prediction methods for the discovery of small-molecule chiral catalysts
,” Nat. Rev. Chem.
2
, 290
–305
(2018
).69.
G. H.
Gu
, C.
Choi
, Y.
Lee
, A. B.
Situmorang
, J.
Noh
, Y. H.
Kim
, and Y.
Jung
, “Progress in computational and machine-learning methods for heterogeneous small-molecule activation
,” Adv. Mater.
32
, e1907865
(2020
).70.
Y.
Guan
, C. W.
Coley
, H.
Wu
, D.
Ranasinghe
, E.
Heid
, T. J.
Struble
, L.
Pattanaik
, W. H.
Green
, and K. F.
Jensen
, “Regio-selectivity prediction with a machine-learned reaction representation and on-the-fly quantum mechanical descriptors
,” Chem. Sci.
12
, 2198
–2208
(2021
).71.
X.
Li
, S. Q.
Zhang
, L. C.
Xu
, and X.
Hong
, “Predicting regioselectivity in radical C–H functionalization of heterocycles through machine learning
,” Angew. Chem., Int. Ed.
59
, 13253
–13259
(2020
).72.
A.
Tomberg
, M. J.
Johansson
, and P.-O.
Norrby
, “A predictive tool for electrophilic aromatic substitutions using machine learning
,” J. Org. Chem.
84
, 4695
–4703
(2019
).73.
P.-L.
Kang
, C.
Shang
, and Z.-P.
Liu
, “Glucose to 5-hydroxymethylfurfural: Origin of site-selectivity resolved by machine learning based reaction sampling
,” J. Am. Chem. Soc.
141
, 20525
–20536
(2019
).74.
W.
Beker
, E. P.
Gajewska
, T.
Badowski
, and B. A.
Grzybowski
, “Prediction of major regio-, site-, and diastereoisomers in Diels–Alder reactions by using machine-learning: The importance of physically meaningful descriptors
,” Angew. Chem., Int. Ed.
58
, 4515
–4519
(2019
).75.
J. C.
Kromann
, J. H.
Jensen
, M.
Kruszyk
, M.
Jessing
, and M.
Jørgensen
, “Fast and accurate prediction of the regioselectivity of electrophilic aromatic substitution reactions
,” Chem. Sci.
9
, 660
–665
(2018
).76.
M.
Das
, P.
Sharma
, and R. B.
Sunoj
, “Machine learning studies on asymmetric relay Heck reaction–potential avenues for reaction development
,” J. Chem. Phys.
156
, 114303
(2022
).77.
S.
Bray
and S.
Wolf
, “Non-equilibrium biomolecular simulation pathway analysis assisted by machine learning and graph methods
,” arXiv:2205.09894v1 [physics.bio-ph] (2022
).78.
S.
Zhang
, M.
Makoś
, R.
Jadrich
, E.
Kraka
, K.
Barros
, B.
Nebgen
, S.
Tretiak
, O.
Isayev
, N.
Lubbers
, R.
Messerly
, and J.
Smith
, “Exploring the frontiers of chemistry with a general reactive machine learning potential
,” ChemRxiv:10.26434/chemrxiv-2022-15ct6-v2 (2022
) (Cambridge: Cambridge Open Engage). This content is a preprint and has not been peer-reviewed.79.
S.
Takamoto
, C.
Shinagawa
, D.
Motoki
, K.
Nakago
, W.
Li
, I.
Kurata
, T.
Watanabe
, Y.
Yayama
, H.
Iriguchi
, Y.
Asano
, T.
Onodera
, T.
Ishii
, T.
Kudo
, H.
Ono
, R.
Sawada
, R.
Ishitani
, M.
Ong
, T.
Yamaguchi
, T.
Kataoka
, A.
Hayashi
, N.
Charoenphakdee
, and T.
Ibuka
, “Towards universal neural network potential for material discovery applicable to arbitrary combination of 45 elements
,” Nat. Commun.
13
, 2991
(2022
).80.
M.
Schreiner
, A.
Bhowmik
, T.
Vegge
, J.
Busk
, and O.
Winther
, “Transition1x-a dataset for building generalizable reactive machine learning potentials
,” Sci Data.
9
, 779
(2022
).81.
Y.-F.
Shi
, P.-L.
Kang
, C.
Shang
, and Z.-P.
Liu
, “Methanol synthesis from CO2/CO mixture on Cu–Zn catalysts from microkinetics-guided machine learning pathway search
,” J. Am. Chem. Soc.
144
, 13401
–13414
(2022
).82.
J.
Neumann
and N.
Schwierz
, “Artificial intelligence resolves kinetic pathways of magnesium binding to RNA
,” J. Chem. Theory Comput.
18
, 1202
–1212
(2022
).83.
A.
Mondal
, D.
Kussainova
, S.
Yue
, and A. Z.
Panagiotopoulos
, “Modeling chemical reactions in alkali carbonate–hydroxide electrolytes with deep learning potentials
,” J. Chem. Theory Comput.
(published online 2022
).84.
Q.
Chu
, K. H.
Luo
, and D.
Chen
, “Exploring complex reaction networks using neural network-based molecular dynamics simulation
,” J. Phys. Chem. Lett.
13
, 4052
–4057
(2022
).85.
S.
Chen
and Y.
Jung
, “Deep retrosynthetic reaction prediction using local reactivity and global attention
,” JACS Au
1
, 1612
–1620
(2021
).86.
S. J.
Ang
, W.
Wang
, D.
Schwalbe-Koda
, S.
Axelrod
, and R.
Gómez-Bombarelli
, “Active learning accelerates ab initio molecular dynamics on reactive energy surfaces
,” Chem
7
, 738
–751
(2021
).87.
J.
Zeng
, L.
Cao
, M.
Xu
, T.
Zhu
, and J. Z. H.
Zhang
, “Complex reaction processes in combustion unraveled by neural network-based molecular dynamics simulation
,” Nat. Commun.
11
, 5713
(2020
).88.
A.
Thakkar
, N.
Selmi
, J.-L.
Reymond
, O.
Engkvist
, and E. J.
Bjerrum
, “‘Ring breaker’: Neural network driven synthesis prediction of the ring system chemical space
,” J. Med. Chem.
63
, 8791
–8808
(2020
).89.
M. H. S.
Segler
, M.
Preuss
, and M. P.
Waller
, “Planning chemical syntheses with deep neural networks and symbolic AI
,” Nature
555
, 604
–610
(2018
).90.
J. M.
Granda
, L.
Donina
, V.
Dragone
, D.-L.
Long
, and L.
Cronin
, “Controlling an organic synthesis robot with machine learning to search for new reactivity
,” Nature
559
, 377
–381
(2018
).91.
Z. W.
Ulissi
, A. J.
Medford
, T.
Bligaard
, and J. K.
Nørskov
, “To address surface reaction network complexity using scaling relations machine learning and DFT calculations
,” Nat. Commun.
8
, 14621
(2017
).92.
D. H.
Nguyen
and K.
Tsuda
, “Generating reaction trees with cascaded variational autoencoders
,” J. Chem. Phys.
156
, 044117
(2022
).93.
C. W.
Coley
, W.
Jin
, L.
Rogers
, T. F.
Jamison
, T. S.
Jaakkola
, W. H.
Green
, R.
Barzilay
, and K. F.
Jensen
, “A graph-convolutional neural network model for the prediction of chemical reactivity
,” Chem. Sci.
10
, 370
–377
(2019
).94.
P.
Schwaller
, D.
Probst
, A. C.
Vaucher
, V. H.
Nair
, D.
Kreutter
, T.
Laino
, and J.-L.
Reymond
, “Mapping the space of chemical reactions using attention-based neural networks
,” Nat. Mach. Intell.
3
, 144
–152
(2021
).95.
W.
Bort
, I. I.
Baskin
, T.
Gimadiev
, A.
Mukanov
, R.
Nugmanov
, P.
Sidorov
, G.
Marcou
, D.
Horvath
, O.
Klimchuk
, T.
Madzhidov
, and A.
Varnek
, “Discovery of novel chemical reactions by deep generative recurrent neural network
,” Sci. Rep.
11
, 3178
(2021
).96.
X.
Liu
, T.
Zhang
, T.
Yang
, X.
Liu
, X.
Song
, Y.
Yang
, N.
Li
, G.-M.
Rignanese
, Y.
Li
, and X.
Wen
, “Solving chemistry problems via an end-to-end approach: A proof of concept
,” J. Phys. Chem. A
124
, 8866
–8873
(2020
).97.
M.
Fujinami
, J.
Seino
, and H.
Nakai
, “Quantum chemical reaction prediction method based on machine learning
,” Bull. Chem. Soc. Jpn.
93
, 685
–693
(2020
).98.
P.
Schwaller
, T.
Laino
, T.
Gaudin
, P.
Bolgar
, C. A.
Hunter
, C.
Bekas
, and A. A.
Lee
, “Molecular transformer: A model for uncertainty-calibrated chemical reaction prediction
,” ACS Cent. Sci.
5
, 1572
–1583
(2019
).99.
P.
Schwaller
, T.
Gaudin
, D.
Lányi
, C.
Bekas
, and T.
Laino
, “‘Found in translation’: Predicting outcomes of complex organic chemistry reactions using neural sequence-to-sequence models
,” Chem. Sci.
9
, 6091
–6098
(2018
).100.
Y.
Kim
, J. W.
Kim
, Z.
Kim
, and W. Y.
Kim
, “Efficient prediction of reaction paths through molecular graph and reaction network analysis
,” Chem. Sci.
9
, 825
–835
(2018
).101.
D.
Fooshee
, A.
Mood
, E.
Gutman
, M.
Tavakoli
, G.
Urban
, F.
Liu
, N.
Huynh
, D.
Van Vranken
, and P.
Baldi
, “Deep learning for chemical reaction prediction
,” Mol. Syst. Des. Eng.
3
, 442
–452
(2018
).102.
G.
Skoraczynski
, P.
Dittwald
, B.
Miasojedow
, S.
Szymkuc
, E. P.
Gajewska
, B. A.
Grzybowski
, and A.
Gambin
, “Predicting the outcomes of organic reactions via machine learning: Are current descriptors sufficient?
,” Sci. Rep.
7
, 3582
(2017
).103.
M. H. S.
Segler
and M. P.
Waller
, “Neural-symbolic machine learning for retrosynthesis and reaction prediction
,” Chem. Eur. J.
23
, 5966
–5971
(2017
).104.
B.
Liu
, B.
Ramsundar
, P.
Kawthekar
, J.
Shi
, J.
Gomes
, Q.
Luu Nguyen
, S.
Ho
, J.
Sloane
, P.
Wender
, and V.
Pande
, “Retrosynthetic reaction prediction using neural sequence-to-sequence models
,” ACS Cent. Sci.
3
, 1103
–1113
(2017
).105.
C. W.
Coley
, R.
Barzilay
, T. S.
Jaakkola
, W. H.
Green
, and K. F.
Jensen
, “Prediction of organic reaction outcomes using machine learning
,” ACS Cent. Sci.
3
, 434
–443
(2017
).106.
J. N.
Wei
, D.
Duvenaud
, and A.
Aspuru-Guzik
, “Neural networks for the prediction of organic chemistry reactions
,” ACS Cent. Sci.
2
, 725
–732
(2016
).107.
P.
Sadowski
, D.
Fooshee
, N.
Subrahmanya
, and P.
Baldi
, “Synergies between quantum mechanics and machine learning in reaction prediction
,” J. Chem. Inf. Model.
56
, 2125
–2128
(2016
).108.
M.
Gastegger
and P.
Marquetand
, “High-dimensional neural network potentials for organic reactions and an improved training algorithm
,” J. Chem. Theory Comput.
11
, 2187
–2198
(2015
).109.
M. A.
Kayala
and P.
Baldi
, “Reaction predictor: Prediction of complex chemical reactions at the mechanistic level using machine learning
,” J. Chem. Inf. Model.
52
, 2526
–2540
(2012
).110.
M. A.
Kayala
, C.-A.
Azencott
, J. H.
Chen
, and P.
Baldi
, “Learning to predict chemical reactions
,” J. Chem. Inf. Model.
51
, 2209
–2222
(2011
).111.
R.
Körner
and J.
Apostolakis
, “Automatic determination of reaction mappings and reaction center information. 1. The imaginary transition state energy approach
,” J. Chem. Inf. Model.
48
, 1181
–1189
(2008
).112.
G. M.
Ghiandoni
, M. J.
Bodkin
, B.
Chen
, D.
Hristozov
, J. E. A.
Wallace
, J.
Webster
, and V. J.
Gillet
, “Development and application of a data-driven reaction classification model: Comparison of an electronic lab notebook and medicinal chemistry literature
,” J. Chem. Inf. Model.
59
, 4167
–4187
(2019
).113.
A.
Denzel
and J.
Kästner
, “Gaussian process regression for transition state search
,” J. Chem. Theory Comput.
14
, 5777
–5786
(2018
).114.
R.
Jackson
, W.
Zhang
, and J.
Pearson
, “TSNet: Predicting transition state structures with tensor field networks and transfer learning
,” Chem. Sci.
12
, 10022
–10040
(2021
).115.
S.
Heinen
, G. F.
von Rudorff
, and O. A.
von Lilienfeld
, “Transition state search and geometry relaxation throughout chemical compound space with quantum machine learning
,” J. Chem. Phys.
157
, 221102
(2022
).116.
I.
Fdez Galván
, G.
Raggi
, and R.
Lindh
, “Restricted-variance constrained, reaction path, and transition state molecular optimizations using gradient-enhanced kriging
,” J. Chem. Theory Comput.
17
, 571
–582
(2021
).117.
D.
Chen
, C.
Shang
, and Z.-P.
Liu
, “Automated search for optimal surface phases (ASOPs) in grand canonical ensemble powered by machine learning
,” J. Chem. Phys.
156
, 094104
(2022
).118.
L.
Pattanaik
, J. B.
Ingraham
, C. A.
Grambow
, and W. H.
Green
, “Generating transition states of isomerization reactions with deep learning
,” Phys. Chem. Chem. Phys.
22
, 23618
–23626
(2020
).119.
A. A.
Peterson
, “Acceleration of saddle-point searches with machine learning
,” J. Chem. Phys.
145
, 074106
(2016
).120.
Z. D.
Pozun
, K.
Hansen
, D.
Sheppard
, M.
Rupp
, K.-R.
Müller
, and G.
Henkelman
, “Optimizing transition states via kernel-based machine learning
,” J. Chem. Phys.
136
, 174101
(2012
).121.
K.
Jorner
, A.
Tomberg
, C.
Bauer
, C.
Sköld
, and P.-O.
Norrby
, “Organic reactivity from mechanism to machine learning
,” Nat. Rev. Chem.
5
, 240
–255
(2021
).122.
S.
Stocker
, G.
Csányi
, K.
Reuter
, and J. T.
Margraf
, “Machine learning in chemical reaction space
,” Nat. Commun.
11
, 5505
(2020
).123.
Z.
Wang
, W.
Zhao
, G.-F.
Hao
, and B.-A.
Song
, “Automated synthesis: Current platforms and further needs
,” Drug Discovery Today
25
, 2006
–2011
(2020
).124.
F.
Strieth-Kalthoff
, F.
Sandfort
, M. H. S.
Segler
, and F.
Glorius
, “Machine learning the ropes: Principles, applications and directions in synthetic chemistry
,” Chem. Soc. Rev.
49
, 6154
–6168
(2020
).125.
P. S.
Gromski
, A. B.
Henson
, J. M.
Granda
, and L.
Cronin
, “How to explore chemical space using algorithms and automation
,” Nat. Rev. Chem.
3
, 119
–128
(2019
).126.
A. F.
de Almeida
, R.
Moreira
, and T.
Rodrigues
, “Synthetic organic chemistry driven by artificial intelligence
,” Nat. Rev. Chem.
3
, 589
–604
(2019
).127.
O.
Engkvist
, P.-O.
Norrby
, N.
Selmi
, Y.-h.
Lam
, Z.
Peng
, E. C.
Sherer
, W.
Amberg
, T.
Erhard
, and L. A.
Smyth
, “Computational prediction of chemical reactions: Current status and outlook
,” Drug Discovery Today
23
, 1203
–1218
(2018
).128.
C. W.
Coley
, W. H.
Green
, and K. F.
Jensen
, “Machine learning in computer-aided synthesis planning
,” Acc. Chem. Res.
51
, 1281
–1289
(2018
).129.
Z.
Qiao
, A. S.
Christensen
, M.
Welborn
, F. R.
Manby
, A.
Anandkumar
, and T. F.
Miller
, “Informing geometric deep learning with electronic interactions to accelerate quantum chemistry
,” Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. U. S. A.
119
, e2205221119
(2022
).130.
P.
Zheng
, R.
Zubatyuk
, W.
Wu
, O.
Isayev
, and P. O.
Dral
, “Artificial intelligence-enhanced quantum chemical method with broad applicability
,” Nat. Commun.
12
, 7022
(2021
).131.
A. S.
Christensen
, S. K.
Sirumalla
, Z.
Qiao
, M. B.
O’Connor
, D. G. A.
Smith
, F.
Ding
, P. J.
Bygrave
, A.
Anandkumar
, M.
Welborn
, F. R.
Manby
, and T. F.
Miller
III, “OrbNet Denali: A machine learning potential for biological and organic chemistry with semi-empirical cost and DFT accuracy
,” J. Chem. Phys.
155
, 204103
(2021
).132.
C.
Devereux
, J. S.
Smith
, K. K.
Huddleston
, K.
Barros
, R.
Zubatyuk
, O.
Isayev
, and A. E.
Roitberg
, “Extending the applicability of the ANI deep learning molecular potential to sulfur and halogens
,” J. Chem. Theory Comput.
16
, 4192
–4202
(2020
).133.
J. S.
Smith
, B. T.
Nebgen
, R.
Zubatyuk
, N.
Lubbers
, C.
Devereux
, K.
Barros
, S.
Tretiak
, O.
Isayev
, and A. E.
Roitberg
, “Approaching coupled cluster accuracy with a general-purpose neural network potential through transfer learning
,” Nat. Commun.
10
, 2903
(2019
).134.
J. S.
Smith
, O.
Isayev
, and A. E.
Roitberg
, “ANI-1: An extensible neural network potential with DFT accuracy at force field computational cost
,” Chem. Sci.
8
, 3192
–3203
(2017
).135.
M.
Schreiner
, A.
Bhowmik
, T.
Vegge
, P. B.
Jørgensen
, and O.
Winther
, “NeuralNEB—neural networks can find reaction paths fast
,” Mach. Learn. Sci. Technol.
3
, 045022
(2022
).136.
P.
Zheng
, W.
Yang
, W.
Wu
, O.
Isayev
, and P. O.
Dral
, “Toward chemical accuracy in predicting enthalpies of formation with general-purpose data-driven methods
,” J. Phys. Chem. Lett.
13
, 3479
–3491
(2022
).137.
R.
Ramakrishnan
, P. O.
Dral
, M.
Rupp
, and O. A.
von Lilienfeld
, “Big data meets quantum chemistry approximations: The Δ-machine learning approach
,” J. Chem. Theory Comput.
11
, 2087
–2096
(2015
).138.
L.
Goerigk
, A.
Hansen
, C.
Bauer
, S.
Ehrlich
, A.
Najibi
, and S.
Grimme
, “A look at the density functional theory zoo with the advanced GMTKN55 database for general main group thermochemistry, kinetics and noncovalent interactions
,” Phys. Chem. Chem. Phys.
19
, 32184
–32215
(2017
).139.
Y.
Zhao
and D. G.
Truhlar
, “Exploring the limit of accuracy of the global hybrid meta density functional for main-group thermochemistry, kinetics, and noncovalent interactions
,” J. Chem. Theory Comput.
4
, 1849
–1868
(2008
).140.
S.
Grimme
, S.
Ehrlich
, and L.
Goerigk
, “Effect of the damping function in dispersion corrected density functional theory
,” J. Comput. Chem.
32
, 1456
–1465
(2011
).141.
S.
Grimme
, J.
Antony
, S.
Ehrlich
, and H.
Krieg
, “A consistent and accurate ab initio parametrization of density functional dispersion correction (DFT-D) for the 94 elements H-Pu
,” J. Chem. Phys.
132
, 154104
(2010
).142.
A.
Schäfer
, H.
Horn
, and R.
Ahlrichs
, “Fully optimized contracted Gaussian-basis sets for atoms Li to Kr
,” J. Chem. Phys.
97
, 2571
–2577
(1992
).143.
A.
Schäfer
, C.
Huber
, and R.
Ahlrichs
, “Fully optimized contracted Gaussian-basis sets of triple zeta valence quality for atoms Li to Kr
,” J. Chem. Phys.
100
, 5829
–5835
(1994
).144.
F.
Weigend
and R.
Ahlrichs
, “Balanced basis sets of split valence, triple zeta valence and quadruple zeta valence quality for H to Rn: Design and assessment of accuracy
,” Phys. Chem. Chem. Phys.
7
, 3297
–3305
(2005
).145.
F.
Weigend
, “Accurate Coulomb-fitting basis sets for H to Rn
,” Phys. Chem. Chem. Phys.
8
, 1057
–1065
(2006
).146.
A. D.
Becke
, “Density-functional thermochemistry. III. The role of exact exchange
,” J. Chem. Phys.
98
, 5648
–5652
(1993
).147.
V. K.
Prasad
, Z.
Pei
, S.
Edelmann
, A.
Otero-de-la-Roza
, and G. A.
DiLabio
, “BH9, a new comprehensive benchmark data set for barrier heights and reaction energies: Assessment of density functional approximations and basis set incompleteness potentials
,” J. Chem. Theory Comput.
18
, 151
–166
(2022
);
[PubMed]
V. K.
Prasad
, Z.
Pei
, S.
Edelmann
, A.
Otero-de-la-Roza
, and G. A.
DiLabio
J. Chem. Theory Comput.
18
, 4041
–4044
(2022
) (Correction).
[PubMed]
148.
K.
Spiekermann
, L.
Pattanaik
, and W. H.
Green
, “High accuracy barrier heights, enthalpies, and rate coefficients for chemical reactions
,” Sci. Data
9
, 417
(2022
).149.
P.
Pernot
, “Prediction uncertainty validation for computational chemists
,” J. Chem. Phys.
157
, 144103
(2022
).150.
G.
Piccini
, M.
Alessio
, and J.
Sauer
, “Ab initio calculation of rate constants for molecule–surface reactions with chemical accuracy
,” Angew. Chem., Int. Ed.
55
, 5235
–5237
(2016
).151.
Y.
Freund
, H. S.
Seung
, E.
Shamir
, and N.
Tishby
, “Selective sampling using the query by committee algorithm
,” Mach. Learn.
28
, 133
–168
(1997
).152.
K.
Tran
, W.
Neiswanger
, J.
Yoon
, Q.
Zhang
, E.
Xing
, and Z. W.
Ulissi
, “Methods for comparing uncertainty quantifications for material property predictions
,” Mach. Learn.: Sci. Technol.
1
, 025006
(2020
).153.
M.
Hoxha
and H.
Kamberaj
, “Automation of some macromolecular properties using a machine learning approach
,” Mach. Learn.: Sci. Technol.
2
, 035016
(2021
).154.
F.
Musil
, M. J.
Willatt
, M. A.
Langovoy
, and M.
Ceriotti
, “Fast and accurate uncertainty estimation in chemical machine learning
,” J. Chem. Theory Comput.
15
, 906
–915
(2019
).155.
G.
Imbalzano
, Y.
Zhuang
, V.
Kapil
, K.
Rossi
, E. A.
Engel
, F.
Grasselli
, and M.
Ceriotti
, “Uncertainty estimation for molecular dynamics and sampling
,” J. Chem. Phys.
154
, 074102
(2021
).156.
M.
Tynes
, W.
Gao
, D. J.
Burrill
, E. R.
Batista
, D.
Perez
, P.
Yang
, and N.
Lubbers
, “Pairwise difference regression: A machine learning meta-algorithm for improved prediction and uncertainty quantification in chemical search
,” J. Chem. Inf. Model.
61
, 3846
–3857
(2021
).157.
L.
Hirschfeld
, K.
Swanson
, K.
Yang
, R.
Barzilay
, and C. W.
Coley
, “Uncertainty quantification using neural networks for molecular property prediction
,” J. Chem. Inf. Model.
60
, 3770
–3780
(2020
).158.
I.
Cortés-Ciriano
and A.
Bender
, “Deep confidence: A computationally efficient framework for calculating reliable prediction errors for deep neural networks
,” J. Chem. Inf. Model.
59
, 1269
–1281
(2019
).159.
J.
Proppe
, S.
Gugler
, and M.
Reiher
, “Gaussian process-based refinement of dispersion corrections
,” J. Chem. Theory Comput.
15
, 6046
–6060
(2019
).160.
A.
Nigam
, R.
Pollice
, M. F. D.
Hurley
, R. J.
Hickman
, M.
Aldeghi
, N.
Yoshikawa
, S.
Chithrananda
, V. A.
Voelz
, and A.
Aspuru-Guzik
, “Assigning confidence to molecular property prediction
,” Expert Opin. Drug Discovery
16
, 1009
–1023
(2021
).161.
C.-I.
Yang
and Y.-P.
Li
, “Explainable uncertainty quantifications for deep learning-based molecular property prediction
,” J. Cheminform.
15
, 13
(2023
).162.
S. B.
Albert Zhu
, A.
Musaelian
, and B.
Kozinsky
, “Fast uncertainty estimates in deep learning interatomic potentials
,” arXiv:2211.09866v1 [physics.comp-ph] (2022
).163.
S. D.
Huang
, C.
Shang
, P. L.
Kang
, X. J.
Zhang
, and Z. P.
Liu
, “LASP: Fast global potential energy surface exploration
,” Wiley Interdiscip. Rev.: Comput. Mol. Sci.
9
, e1415
(2019
).164.
A. J. M.
Ribeiro
, G. L.
Holliday
, N.
Furnham
, J. D.
Tyzack
, K.
Ferris
, and J. M.
Thornton
, “Mechanism and catalytic site Atlas (M-CSA): A database of enzyme reaction mechanisms and active sites
,” Nucleic Acids Res.
46
, D618
–D623
(2018
).165.
L.
Goerigk
and S.
Grimme
, “A general database for main group thermochemistry, kinetics, and noncovalent interactions—Assessment of common and reparameterized (meta-)GGA density functionals
,” J. Chem. Theory Comput.
6
, 107
–126
(2010
).166.
V.
Guner
, K. S.
Khuong
, A. G.
Leach
, P. S.
Lee
, M. D.
Bartberger
, and K. N.
Houk
, “A standard set of pericyclic reactions of hydrocarbons for the benchmarking of computational methods: The performance of ab initio, density functional, CASSCF, CASPT2, and CBS-QB3 methods for the prediction of activation barriers, reaction energetics, and transition state geometries
,” J. Phys. Chem. A
107
, 11445
–11459
(2003
).167.
T. C.
Dinadayalane
, R.
Vijaya
, A.
Smitha
, and G. N.
Sastry
, “Diels–Alder reactivity of butadiene and cyclic five-membered dienes [(CH)4X, X = CH2, SiH2, O, NH, PH, and S] with ethylene: A benchmark study
,” J. Phys. Chem. A
106
, 1627
–1633
(2002
).168.
D. H.
Ess
and K. N.
Houk
, “Activation energies of pericyclic reactions: Performance of DFT, MP2, and CBS-QB3 methods for the prediction of activation barriers and reaction energetics of 1,3-dipolar cycloadditions, and revised activation enthalpies for a standard set of hydrocarbon pericyclic reactions
,” J. Phys. Chem. A
109
, 9542
–9553
(2005
).169.
R.
Krishnan
, J. S.
Binkley
, R.
Seeger
, and J. A.
Pople
, “Self‐consistent molecular orbital methods. XX. A basis set for correlated wave functions
,” J. Chem. Phys.
72
, 650
–654
(1980
).170.
J. A.
Montgomery
, M. J.
Frisch
, J. W.
Ochterski
, and G. A.
Petersson
, “A complete basis set model chemistry. VI. Use of density functional geometries and frequencies
,” J. Chem. Phys.
110
, 2822
–2827
(1999
).171.
L.
Goerigk
and R.
Sharma
, “The INV24 test set: How well do quantum-chemical methods describe inversion and racemization barriers?
,” Can. J. Chem.
94
, 1133
–1143
(2016
).172.
A.
Karton
, R. J.
O’Reilly
, B.
Chan
, and L.
Radom
, “Determination of barrier heights for proton exchange in small water, ammonia, and hydrogen fluoride clusters with G4(MP2)-type, MPn, and SCS-MPn procedures—A caveat
,” J. Chem. Theory Comput.
8
, 3128
–3136
(2012
).173.
A.
Karton
, R. J.
O’Reilly
, and L.
Radom
, “Assessment of theoretical procedures for calculating barrier heights for a diverse set of water-catalyzed proton-transfer reactions
,” J. Phys. Chem. A
116
, 4211
–4221
(2012
).174.
C.
Leys
, C.
Ley
, O.
Klein
, P.
Bernard
, and L.
Licata
, “Detecting outliers: Do not use standard deviation around the mean, use absolute deviation around the median
,” J. Exp. Soc. Psychol.
49
, 764
–766
(2013
).175.
T.
Helgaker
, P.
Jørgensen
, and J.
Olsen
, Molecular Electronic-Structure Theory
(John Wiley and Sons Ltd.
, Chichester
, 2000
).176.
E.
Caldeweyher
, C.
Bannwarth
, and S.
Grimme
, “Extension of the D3 dispersion coefficient model
,” J. Chem. Phys.
147
, 034112
(2017
).177.
M.
Nakata
, T.
Shimazaki
, M.
Hashimoto
, and T.
Maeda
, “PubChemQC PM6: Data sets of 221 million molecules with optimized molecular geometries and electronic properties
,” J. Chem. Inf. Model.
60
, 5891
–5899
(2020
).178.
P. O.
Dral
, P.
Zheng
, B.-X.
Xue
, F.
Ge
, Y.-F.
Hou
, and M.
Pinheiro
, Jr., MLatom: A package for atomistic simulations with machine learning, Xiamen University
, Xiamen, China
, http://MLatom.com (accessed 11 January 2023), 2013–2022
.179.
P. O.
Dral
, “MLatom: A program package for quantum chemical Research assisted by machine learning
,” J. Comput. Chem.
40
, 2339
–2347
(2019
).180.
P. O.
Dral
, F.
Ge
, B.-X.
Xue
, Y.-F.
Hou
, M.
Pinheiro
, Jr., J.
Huang
, and M.
Barbatti
, “MLatom 2: An integrative platform for atomistic machine learning
,” Top. Curr. Chem.
379
, 27
(2021
).181.
W.
Thiel
, with contributions from M.
Beck
, S.
Billeter
, R.
Kevorkiants
, M.
Kolb
, A.
Koslowski
, S.
Patchkovskii
, A.
Turner
, E.-U.
Wallenborn
, W.
Weber
, L.
Spörkel
, and P. O.
Dral
, MNDO2020: A semiempirical quantum chemistry program, Max-Planck-Institut für Kohlenforschung
, Mülheim an der Ruhr
, https://mndo.kofo.mpg.de (accessed 11 January 2023), 2020
.182.
X.
Gao
, F.
Ramezanghorbani
, O.
Isayev
, J. S.
Smith
, and A. E.
Roitberg
, “TorchANI: A free and open source PyTorch-based deep learning implementation of the ANI neural network potentials
,” J. Chem. Inf. Model.
60
, 3408
–3415
(2020
).183.
E.
Caldeweyher
, S.
Ehlert
, and S.
Grimme
, DFT-D4, Version 2.5.0, Mulliken Center for Theoretical Chemistry, University of Bonn
, 2020
.184.
M. J.
Frisch
, G. W.
Trucks
, H. B.
Schlegel
, G. E.
Scuseria
, M. A.
Robb
, J. R.
Cheeseman
, G.
Scalmani
, V.
Barone
, G. A.
Petersson
, H.
Nakatsuji
, X.
Li
, M.
Caricato
, A. V.
Marenich
, J.
Bloino
, B. G.
Janesko
, R.
Gomperts
, B.
Mennucci
, H. P.
Hratchian
, J. V.
Ortiz
, A. F.
Izmaylov
, J. L.
Sonnenberg
, Williams
, F.
Ding
, F.
Lipparini
, F.
Egidi
, J.
Goings
, B.
Peng
, A.
Petrone
, T.
Henderson
, D.
Ranasinghe
, V. G.
Zakrzewski
, J.
Gao
, N.
Rega
, G.
Zheng
, W.
Liang
, M.
Hada
, M.
Ehara
, K.
Toyota
, R.
Fukuda
, J.
Hasegawa
, M.
Ishida
, T.
Nakajima
, Y.
Honda
, O.
Kitao
, H.
Nakai
, T.
Vreven
, K.
Throssell
, J. A.
Montgomery
, Jr., J. E.
Peralta
, F.
Ogliaro
, M. J.
Bearpark
, J. J.
Heyd
, E. N.
Brothers
, K. N.
Kudin
, V. N.
Staroverov
, T. A.
Keith
, R.
Kobayashi
, J.
Normand
, K.
Raghavachari
, A. P.
Rendell
, J. C.
Burant
, S. S.
Iyengar
, J.
Tomasi
, M.
Cossi
, J. M.
Millam
, M.
Klene
, C.
Adamo
, R.
Cammi
, J. W.
Ochterski
, R. L.
Martin
, K.
Morokuma
, O.
Farkas
, J. B.
Foresman
, and D. J.
Fox
, Gaussian 16, Rev. A.01, Wallingford, CT
, 2016
.185.
See https://github.com/grimme-lab/xtb for Semiempirical extended tight-binding program package xtb (accessed 19 November 2022).
186.
F.
Neese
, “The ORCA program system
,” Wiley Interdiscip. Rev. Comput. Mol. Sci.
2
, 73
–78
(2012
).187.
F.
Neese
, “Software update: The ORCA program system, version 4.0
,” Wiley Interdiscip. Rev. Comput. Mol. Sci.
8
, e1327
(2018
).188.
G. A.
Andrienko
, Chemcraft 1.8, 2016
.189.
F.
Bosia
, P.
Zheng
, A.
Vaucher
, T.
Weymuth
, P. O.
Dral
, and M.
Reiher
, “Ultra-fast semi-empirical quantum chemistry for high-throughput computational campaigns with sparrow
,” J. Chem. Phys.
158
, 054118
(2023
).190.
P. O.
Dral
, Y.
Chen
, Y.
Ou
, P.
Zheng
, F.
Ge
, and Y.
Huang
, “Data for Benchmarking general-purpose machine learning-based quantum mechanical method AIQM1 on reaction barrier heights
,” Figshare. .© 2023 Author(s). Published under an exclusive license by AIP Publishing.
2023
Author(s)
You do not currently have access to this content.
