TL;DR
This paper benchmarks the MODNet approach against MatBench datasets, highlighting its strengths, limitations, and the importance of evaluating model uncertainty and bias for reliable materials science predictions.
Contribution
It introduces a comprehensive benchmarking of MODNet on MatBench, emphasizing the need for diverse metrics and uncertainty quantification in model evaluation.
Findings
MODNet outperforms on 6 of 13 tasks
MODNet performs well with less than 10,000 samples
Uncertainty assessment reveals impact of data bias and imbalance
Abstract
As the number of novel data-driven approaches to material science continues to grow, it is crucial to perform consistent quality, reliability and applicability assessments of model performance. In this paper, we benchmark the Materials Optimal Descriptor Network (MODNet) method and architecture against the recently released MatBench v0.1, a curated test suite of materials datasets. MODNet is shown to outperform current leaders on 6 of the 13 tasks, whilst closely matching the current leaders on a further 2 tasks; MODNet performs particularly well when the number of samples is below 10,000. Attention is paid to two topics of concern when benchmarking models. First, we encourage the reporting of a more diverse set of metrics as it leads to a more comprehensive and holistic comparison of model performance. Second, an equally important task is the uncertainty assessment of a model towards a…
Peer Reviews
No public reviews on file for this paper yet. If you reviewed it on a platform where reviews are public (OpenReview, ICLR, NeurIPS, ICML), you can paste yours below so the community can read it here.
Code & Models
Videos
No videos yet. Explain this paper in a talk, walkthrough, or lecture? Add one.
