TY - JOUR
T1 - ReaxFF Parameter Optimization with Monte-Carlo and Evolutionary Algorithms
T2 - Guidelines and Insights
AU - Shchygol, Ganna
AU - Yakovlev, Alexei
AU - Trnka, Tomáš
AU - Van Duin, Adri C.T.
AU - Verstraelen, Toon
N1 - Funding Information:
We are indebted to M. Dittner J. Muller and B. Hartke for providing a copy of the development version of OGOLEM and input files. This project received funding from the European Union’s Horizon 2020 Framework Programme for Research and Innovation: Marie Skłodowska-Curie actions under grant agreement no. 641887 (DEFNET) Innovation in SMEs under grant agreement no. 739746 (NET), and Secure clean and efficient energy under grant agreements no. 764810 (S4CE). T.V. acknowledges the Research Board of Ghent University (BOF) for its financial support. The computational resources and services used in this work were partially provided by the VSC (Flemish Supercomputer Center) and funded by the FWO (Research Foundation Flanders). A.C.T.v.D. acknowledges support from NSF grant NSF CDS&E 1807740.
Funding Information:
We are indebted to M. Dittner, J. Müller, and B. Hartke for providing a copy of the development version of OGOLEM and input files. This project received funding from the European Union’s Horizon 2020 Framework Programme for Research and Innovation: Marie Skłodowska-Curie actions under grant agreement no. 641887 (DEFNET), Innovation in SMEs under grant agreement no. 739746 (NET), and Secure, clean and efficient energy under grant agreements no. 764810 (S4CE). T.V. acknowledges the Research Board of Ghent University (BOF) for its financial support. The computational resources and services used in this work were partially provided by the VSC (Flemish Supercomputer Center) and funded by the FWO (Research Foundation Flanders). A.C.T.v.D. acknowledges support from NSF grant NSF CDS&E 1807740.
Publisher Copyright:
Copyright © 2019 American Chemical Society.
PY - 2019/12/10
Y1 - 2019/12/10
N2 - ReaxFF is a computationally efficient force field to simulate complex reactive dynamics in extended molecular models with diverse chemistries, if reliable force-field parameters are available for the chemistry of interest. If not, they must be optimized by minimizing the error ReaxFF makes on a relevant training set. Because this optimization is far from trivial, many methods, in particular, genetic algorithms (GAs), have been developed to search for the global optimum in parameter space. Recently, two alternative parameter calibration techniques were proposed, that is, Monte-Carlo force field optimizer (MCFF) and covariance matrix adaptation evolutionary strategy (CMA-ES). In this work, CMA-ES, MCFF, and a GA method (OGOLEM) are systematically compared using three training sets from the literature. By repeating optimizations with different random seeds and initial parameter guesses, it is shown that a single optimization run with any of these methods should not be trusted blindly: nonreproducible, poor or premature convergence is a common deficiency. GA shows the smallest risk of getting trapped into a local minimum, whereas CMA-ES is capable of reaching the lowest errors for two-third of the cases, although not systematically. For each method, we provide reasonable default settings, and our analysis offers useful guidelines for their usage in future work. An important side effect impairing parameter optimization is numerical noise. A detailed analysis reveals that it can be reduced, for example, by using exclusively unambiguous geometry optimization in the training set. Even without this noise, many distinct near-optimal parameter vectors can be found, which opens new avenues for improving the training set and detecting overfitting artifacts.
AB - ReaxFF is a computationally efficient force field to simulate complex reactive dynamics in extended molecular models with diverse chemistries, if reliable force-field parameters are available for the chemistry of interest. If not, they must be optimized by minimizing the error ReaxFF makes on a relevant training set. Because this optimization is far from trivial, many methods, in particular, genetic algorithms (GAs), have been developed to search for the global optimum in parameter space. Recently, two alternative parameter calibration techniques were proposed, that is, Monte-Carlo force field optimizer (MCFF) and covariance matrix adaptation evolutionary strategy (CMA-ES). In this work, CMA-ES, MCFF, and a GA method (OGOLEM) are systematically compared using three training sets from the literature. By repeating optimizations with different random seeds and initial parameter guesses, it is shown that a single optimization run with any of these methods should not be trusted blindly: nonreproducible, poor or premature convergence is a common deficiency. GA shows the smallest risk of getting trapped into a local minimum, whereas CMA-ES is capable of reaching the lowest errors for two-third of the cases, although not systematically. For each method, we provide reasonable default settings, and our analysis offers useful guidelines for their usage in future work. An important side effect impairing parameter optimization is numerical noise. A detailed analysis reveals that it can be reduced, for example, by using exclusively unambiguous geometry optimization in the training set. Even without this noise, many distinct near-optimal parameter vectors can be found, which opens new avenues for improving the training set and detecting overfitting artifacts.
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=85075033886&partnerID=8YFLogxK
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=85075033886&partnerID=8YFLogxK
U2 - 10.1021/acs.jctc.9b00769
DO - 10.1021/acs.jctc.9b00769
M3 - Article
C2 - 31657217
AN - SCOPUS:85075033886
SN - 1549-9618
VL - 15
SP - 6799
EP - 6812
JO - Journal of Chemical Theory and Computation
JF - Journal of Chemical Theory and Computation
IS - 12
ER -