PulseExploreJournal ClubDebatesTrendingResearchersJournals
Instagram
HomeExploreJournal ClubTrending
Synapse
⌘+K
Synapse
May 14, 2026The Journal of Chemical Physics2 citations

Assessing generative modeling approaches for free energy estimates in condensed matter

View Full Paper
MSMaximilian SchebekJHJ HEEHEmil Hoffmann

Key Points

  • This work aims to evaluate various generative modeling approaches for estimating free energy differences in condensed matter systems.
  • Benchmarking selected generative approaches including discrete and continuous normalizing flows and FEAT.
  • Using coarse-grained monatomic ice and Lennard-Jones solids as benchmark systems.
  • Reviewing energy evaluation requirements and accuracy of each approach.
  • All models provide highly accurate free energy estimates with fewer energy evaluations than traditional methods.
  • Continuous flows and FEAT demonstrate the highest efficiency in energy evaluations.
  • Discrete flows have significantly lower inference costs compared to other methods.

Abstract

The accurate estimation of free energy differences between two states is a long-standing challenge in molecular simulations. Traditional approaches generally rely on sampling multiple intermediate states to ensure sufficient overlap in phase space and are, consequently, computationally expensive. Boltzmann generators and related generative-model-based methods have recently addressed this challenge by learning a direct probability density transform between two states. However, it remains unclear which approach provides the best trade-off between efficiency, accuracy, and scalability. In this work, we review and benchmark selected generative approaches for condensed-matter systems, including discrete and continuous normalizing flows for targeted free energy perturbation and FEAT (Free Energy Estimators with Adaptive Transport) combined with the escorted Jarzynski equality, using coarse-grained monatomic ice and Lennard-Jones solids as benchmark systems. All models yield highly accurate free energy estimates and, depending on the system, may require fewer energy evaluations than traditional methods. Continuous flows and FEAT are most efficient in energy evaluations, whereas discrete flows have substantially lower inference costs. By releasing all data together with our results, we enable future benchmarking of free energy estimation methods in condensed-phase systems.

Ask AI
Helpful
Bookmark
Share
View Full Paper

Cite This Study

Schebek et al. (2026) studied this question.

synapsesocial.com/papers/6a05677ca550a87e60a1f93bhttps://doi.org/10.1063/5.0320214
Ask AI
Helpful
Bookmark
Share
View Full Paper