The rapid development and large body of literature on machine learning interatomic potentials (MLIPs) can make it difficult to know how to proceed for researchers who are not experts but wish to use these tools. The spirit of this review is to help such researchers by serving as a practical, accessible guide to the state-of-the-art in MLIPs. This review paper covers a broad range of topics related to MLIPs, including (i) central aspects of how and why MLIPs are enablers of many exciting advancements in molecular modeling, (ii) the main underpinnings of different types of MLIPs, including their basic structure and formalism, (iii) the potentially transformative impact of universal MLIPs for both organic and inorganic systems, including an overview of the most recent advances, capabilities, downsides, and potential applications of this nascent class of MLIPs, (iv) a practical guide for estimating and understanding the execution speed of MLIPs, including guidance for users based on hardware availability, type of MLIP used, and prospective simulation size and time, (v) a manual for what MLIP a user should choose for a given application by considering hardware resources, speed requirements, energy and force accuracy requirements, as well as guidance for choosing pre-trained potentials or fitting a new potential from scratch, (vi) discussion around MLIP infrastructure, including sources of training data, pre-trained potentials, and hardware resources for training, (vii) summary of some key limitations of present MLIPs and current approaches to mitigate such limitations, including methods of including long-range interactions, handling magnetic systems, and treatment of excited states, and finally (viii) we finish with some more speculative thoughts on what the future holds for the development and application of MLIPs over the next 3-10+ years.

The development of large databases of material properties, together with the availability of powerful computers, has allowed machine learning (ML) modeling to become a widely used tool for predicting material performances. While confidence intervals are commonly reported for such ML models, prediction intervals, i.e., the uncertainty on each prediction, are not as frequently available. Here, we investigate three easy-to-implement approaches to determine such individual uncertainty, comparing them across ten ML quantities spanning energetics, mechanical, electronic, optical, and spectral properties. Specifically, we focused on the Quantile approach, the direct machine learning of the prediction intervals and Ensemble methods.

Machine learning (ML) is widely used to explore crystal materials and predict their properties. However, the training is time-consuming for deep-learning models, and the regression process is a black box that is hard to interpret. Also, the preprocess to transfer a crystal structure into the input of ML, called descriptor, needs to be designed carefully. To efficiently predict important properties of materials, we propose an approach based on ensemble learning consisting of regression trees to predict formation energy and elastic constants based on small-size datasets of carbon allotropes as an example. Without using any descriptor, the inputs are the properties calculated by molecular dynamics with 9 different classical interatomic potentials. Overall, the results from ensemble learning are more accurate than those from classical interatomic potentials, and ensemble learning can capture the relatively accurate properties from the 9 classical potentials as criteria for predicting the final properties.

Large-language models (LLMs) such as GPT-4 caught the interest of many scientists. Recent studies suggested that these models could be useful in chemistry and materials science. To explore these possibilities, we organized a hackathon. This article chronicles the projects built as part of this hackathon. Participants employed LLMs for various applications, including predicting properties of molecules and materials, designing novel interfaces for tools, extracting knowledge from unstructured data, and developing new educational applications. The diverse topics and the fact that working prototypes could be generated in less than two days highlight that LLMs will profoundly impact the future of our fields. The rich collection of ideas and projects also indicates that the applications of LLMs are not limited to materials science and chemistry but offer potential benefits to a wide range of scientific disciplines.

Uncertainty quantification in Artificial Intelligence (AI)-based predictions of material properties is of immense importance for the success and reliability of AI applications in material science. While confidence intervals are commonly reported for machine learning (ML) models, prediction intervals, i.e., the evaluation of the uncertainty on each prediction, are seldomly available. In this work we compare 3 different approaches to obtain such individual uncertainty, testing them on 12 ML-physical properties. Specifically, we investigated using the Quantile loss function, machine learning the prediction intervals directly and using Gaussian Processes. We identify each approachs advantages and disadvantages and end up slightly favoring the modeling of the individual uncertainties directly, as it is the easiest to fit and, in most cases, minimizes over-and under-estimation of the predicted errors. All data for training and testing were taken from the publicly available JARVIS-DFT database, and the codes developed for computing the prediction intervals are available through JARVIS-Tools.