Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

What is our notion of best-fit for generation, prediction, and relaxation? #12

Open
sgbaird opened this issue May 21, 2022 · 8 comments
Assignees
Labels
notion-of-best Notions of best fit, i.e. how to characterize quality of generated structures.

Comments

@sgbaird
Copy link
Member

sgbaird commented May 21, 2022

EDIT: see also issues with the "notion of best" label

Relaxation is probably the most straightforward - use some crystal distance. Prediction can be about checking against known allotropes, where we take the lowest crystal distance among the allotropes. Generation is the least straightforward. Perhaps a Pareto hypervolume metric via a fictitious adaptive design campaign (e.g. bulk modulus vs. energy above hull)? Perform hyperparameter optimization and then do DFT as the final validation.

@sgbaird
Copy link
Member Author

sgbaird commented May 28, 2022

Another option that struck me is using a time-split. For example:

  1. Split Materials Project into two pieces based on a datetime split
  2. unconditionally generate many crystal structures
    1. 10+ million? Maybe check convergence with number of generated structures (a hyperparameter of the metric)
  3. check fraction of how many close matches with latter half of Materials Project entries to total number of latter half, with higher fraction--> better performance
    1. match tolerance(s) will be other hyperparameter(s) for the metric

@sgbaird
Copy link
Member Author

sgbaird commented Jun 1, 2022

Also can take a look at the model accuracy for Matbench task(s) as a way to probe the "quality" of the xtal2png representation from another perspective #50

@sgbaird
Copy link
Member Author

sgbaird commented Jun 1, 2022

DFT simulations will also be important as a high-cost validation.

@sgbaird
Copy link
Member Author

sgbaird commented Jun 10, 2022

From mp-time-split:

... MPTS-52 can be used with the metrics introduced in CDVAE's compute_metrics.py script (see txie-93/cdvae#10. ...

@sgbaird sgbaird self-assigned this Jun 11, 2022
@sgbaird
Copy link
Member Author

sgbaird commented Jun 12, 2022

Having trouble getting CDVAE to run txie-93/cdvae#19, but can probably splice out the compute_metrics.py while that's getting sorted out.

@sgbaird
Copy link
Member Author

sgbaird commented Jun 16, 2022

compute_metrics.py seems to be tightly integrated with the rest of the codebase. Simplest solution might just be to fork CDVAE, make it pip- and conda-installable, and then include it as a dependency for matbench-genmetrics.

@sgbaird
Copy link
Member Author

sgbaird commented Jun 24, 2022

Might hold off on CDVAE metrics for now. See txie-93/cdvae#10

@sgbaird sgbaird pinned this issue Jul 8, 2022
@sgbaird
Copy link
Member Author

sgbaird commented Aug 20, 2022

As an update, matbench-genmetrics runs in a reasonable time now https://github.com/sparks-baird/matbench-genmetrics/blob/main/notebooks/1.0-matbench-genmetrics-basic.ipynb

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
notion-of-best Notions of best fit, i.e. how to characterize quality of generated structures.
Projects
None yet
Development

No branches or pull requests

1 participant