Construction of Highly Accurate Machine Learning Potential Energy Surfaces for Excited-State Dynamics Simulations Based on Low-Level Data Sets

Shuai Li,Bin-Bin Xie,Bo-Wen Yin,Lihong Liu,Lin Shen,Wei-Hai Fang
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1021/acs.jpca.4c02028
2024-01-01
Abstract:Machine learning is capable of effectively predicting the potential energies of molecules in the presence of high-quality data sets. Its application in the construction of ground- and excited-state potential energy surfaces is attractive to accelerate nonadiabatic molecular dynamics simulations of photochemical reactions. Because of the huge computational cost of excited-state electronic structure calculations, the construction of a high-quality data set becomes a bottleneck. In the present work, we first built two data sets. One was obtained from surface hopping dynamics simulations at the semiempirical OM2/MRCI level. Another was extracted from the dynamics trajectories at the CASSCF level, which was reported previously. The ground- and excited-state potential energy surfaces of ethylene-bridged azobenzene at the CASSCF computational level were constructed based on the former low-level data set. Although non-neural network machine learning methods can achieve good or modest performance during the training process, only neural network models provide reliable predictions on the latter external test data set. The BPNN and SchNet combined with the Delta-ML scheme and the force term in the loss functions are recommended for dynamics simulations. Then, we performed excited-state dynamics simulations of the photoisomerization of ethylene-bridged azobenzene on machine learning potential energy surfaces. Compared with the lifetimes of the first excited state (S-1) estimated at different computational levels, our results on the E isomer are in good agreement with the high-level estimation. However, the overestimation of the Z isomer is unimproved. It suggests that smaller errors during the training process do not necessarily translate to more accurate predictions on high-level potential energies or better performance on nonadiabatic dynamics simulations, at least in the present case.
What problem does this paper attempt to address?