Skip to content

Commit 9b33ada

Browse files
committed
Add documentation for benchmarks
1 parent d2bd718 commit 9b33ada

File tree

4 files changed

+146
-0
lines changed

4 files changed

+146
-0
lines changed
Lines changed: 9 additions & 0 deletions
Original file line numberDiff line numberDiff line change
@@ -0,0 +1,9 @@
1+
==========
2+
Benchmarks
3+
==========
4+
5+
.. toctree::
6+
:maxdepth: 3
7+
8+
surfaces
9+
nebs
Lines changed: 43 additions & 0 deletions
Original file line numberDiff line numberDiff line change
@@ -0,0 +1,43 @@
1+
====
2+
NEBs
3+
====
4+
5+
Li diffusion
6+
============
7+
8+
Summary
9+
-------
10+
11+
Performance in predicting activation energies of Li diffusion along the [010] and [001]
12+
directions of LiFePO_4.
13+
14+
Metrics
15+
-------
16+
17+
1. [010] (path B) energy barrier error
18+
19+
The initial and final structures for the diffusion of lithium along [010] are created
20+
through deletion an atom from the initial structure. These structures are relaxed,
21+
and the Nudged Elastic Band method is used to calculate the energy barrier. This is
22+
compared to the reference activation energy for this path.
23+
24+
25+
2. [001] (path C) energy barrier error
26+
27+
The initial and final structures for the diffusion of lithium along [001] are created
28+
through deletion an atom from the initial structure. These structures are relaxed,
29+
and the Nudged Elastic Band method is used to calculate the energy barrier. This is
30+
compared to the reference activation energy for this path.
31+
32+
33+
Data availability
34+
-----------------
35+
36+
Input structure:
37+
38+
* Downloaded from Materials Project (mp-19017): https://doi.org/10.17188/1193803
39+
40+
Reference data:
41+
42+
* Manually taken from https://doi.org/10.1149/1.1633511.
43+
* Meta-GGA (Perdew-Wang) exchange correlation functional
Lines changed: 93 additions & 0 deletions
Original file line numberDiff line numberDiff line change
@@ -0,0 +1,93 @@
1+
========
2+
Surfaces
3+
========
4+
5+
OC157
6+
=====
7+
8+
Summary
9+
-------
10+
11+
Performance in predicting relative energies between three structures for 157
12+
molecule-surface combinations.
13+
14+
Metrics
15+
-------
16+
17+
1. Energy error
18+
19+
How accurate all relatve energy predictions are.
20+
21+
For each group of three structures, the relative energies are calculated for all pairs
22+
of structures. Models receive a score based on the mean difference between these
23+
predictions and the reference, averaged over all pairs and over all combinations.
24+
25+
2. Ranking error
26+
27+
Whether the most and least stable strucutres are predicted.
28+
29+
For each group of three structures, the relative energies are calculated for all pairs
30+
of structures. Models receive a score of 0, 0.5, or 1, based on whether the predicted
31+
lowest and highest energy pairs match the reference predictions, and this is averaged
32+
for all 157 combinations.
33+
34+
Data availability
35+
-----------------
36+
37+
Input data:
38+
39+
* Surfaces were taken from the Open Catalyst Challenge 2023
40+
41+
* L. Chanussot, A. Das, S. Goyal, T. Lavril, M. Shuaibi, M. Riviere, K. Tran, J. Heras-Domingo, C. Ho, W. Hu, A. Palizhati, A. Sriram, B. Wood, J. Yoon, D. Parikh, C. L. Zitnick, and Z. Ulissi, “Open Catalyst 2020 (OC20) dataset and community challenges,” ACS Catal., vol. 11, pp. 6059–6072, May 2021.
42+
* R. Tran, J. Lan, M. Shuaibi, B. M. Wood, S. Goyal, A. Das, J. Heras-Domingo, A. Kolluru, A. Rizvi, N. Shoghi, A. Sriram, F. Therrien, J. Abed, O. Voznyy, E. H. Sargent, Z. Ulissi, and C. L. Zitnick, “The Open Catalyst 2022 (OC22) data set and challenges for oxide electro catalysts,” ACS Catal., vol.13, pp. 3066–3084, Mar. 2023.
43+
44+
* Structures containing oxygen (O) and several transition metals (Co, Cr, Fe, Mn, Mo,
45+
Ni, V and W) were exlcuded due to Hubbard U correction
46+
47+
Reference data:
48+
49+
* Same as input data
50+
* PBE-D3(BJ), MPRelaxSet settings
51+
52+
53+
S24
54+
===
55+
56+
Summary
57+
-------
58+
59+
Performance in predicting adsorption energies for a diverse set of surfaces and adsorbates.
60+
61+
Metrics
62+
-------
63+
64+
Adsorption energy error
65+
66+
For each combination of surface, molecule, and surface + molecule, the adsorption
67+
energy is calculated by taking the difference between the energy of the surface +
68+
molecule and the sum of individual surface and molecule energies. This is compared to
69+
the reference adsorption energy, calculated in the same way.
70+
71+
Data availability
72+
-----------------
73+
74+
Input data:
75+
76+
* Structures were taken from an amalgamation of published and unpublished works, including:
77+
78+
* Y. S. Al-Hamdani, M. Rossi, D. Alfè, T. Tsatsoulis, B. Ramberger, J. G. Brandenburg, A. Zen, G. Kresse, A. Grüneis, A. Tkatchenko, and A. Michaelides, “Properties of the water to boron nitride interaction: From zero to two dimensions with benchmark accuracy,” J. Chem. Phys., vol. 147, p. 044710, July 2017. 35
79+
* J. G. Brandenburg, A. Zen, M. Fitzner, B. Ramberger, G. Kresse, T. Tsatsoulis, A. Grüneis, A. Michaelides, and D. Alfè, “Physisorption of water on graphene: Subchemical accuracy from many- body electronic structure methods,” J. Phys. Chem. Lett., vol. 10, pp. 358–368, Feb. 2019.
80+
* C. Ehlert, A. Piras, and G. Gryn’ova, “CO2 on graphene: Benchmarking computational approaches to noncovalent interactions,” ACS Omega, vol. 8, pp. 35768–35778, Oct. 2023.
81+
* T. Tsatsoulis, S. Sakong, A. Groß, and A. Grüneis, “Reaction energetics of hydrogen on Si(100) surface: A periodic many-electron theory study,” J. Chem. Phys., vol. 149, p. 244105, Dec. 2018.
82+
* T. Tsatsoulis, F. Hummel, D. Usvyat, M. Schütz, G. H. Booth, S. S. Binnie, M. J. Gillan, D. Alfè, A. Michaelides, and A. Grüneis, “A comparison between quantum chemistry and quantum Monte Carlo techniques for the adsorption of water on the (001) LiH surface,” J. Chem. Phys., vol. 146, p. 204108, May 2017.
83+
* H.-Z. Ye and T. C. Berkelbach, “Ab initio surface chemistry with chemical accuracy,” arXiv preprint arXiv:2309.14640, 2023.
84+
* P. G. Lustemberg, P. N. Plessow, Y. Wang, C. Yang, A. Nefedov, F. Studt, C. Wöll, and M. V. Ganduglia-Pirovano, “Vibrational frequencies of cerium-oxide-bound CO: A challenge for conventional dft methods,” Phys. Rev. Lett., vol. 125, p. 256101, Dec. 2020.
85+
* B. X. Shi, A. Zen, V. Kapil, P. R. Nagy, A. Grüneis, and A. Michaelides, “Many-body methods for surface chemistry come of age: Achieving consensus with experiments,” J. Am. Chem. Soc., vol. 145, pp. 25372–25381, Nov. 2023.
86+
* N. Hanikel, X. Pei, S. Chheda, H. Lyu, W. Jeong, J. Sauer, L. Gagliardi, and O. M. Yaghi, “Evolution of water structures in metal-organic frameworks for improved atmospheric water harvesting,” Science, vol. 374, pp. 454–459, 2021.
87+
* F. Berger, M. Rybicki, and J. Sauer, “Molecular dynamics with chemical accuracy–Alkane adsorption in acidic zeolites,” ACS Catal., vol. 13, pp. 2011–2024, 2023.
88+
* F. Berger and J. Sauer, “Dimerization of linear butenes and pentenes in an acidic zeolite (H-MFI),” Angew. Chem., Int. Ed., vol. 60, pp. 3529–3533, 2021.
89+
90+
Reference data:
91+
92+
* Same as input data
93+
* PBE-D3(BJ), MPRelaxSet settings

docs/source/user_guide/index.rst

Lines changed: 1 addition & 0 deletions
Original file line numberDiff line numberDiff line change
@@ -6,3 +6,4 @@ User guide
66
:maxdepth: 3
77

88
get_started
9+
benchmarks/index

0 commit comments

Comments
 (0)