pith. sign in

arxiv: 1907.03222 · v1 · pith:KDAMYAYGnew · submitted 2019-07-07 · ⚛️ physics.comp-ph · cs.LG· stat.ML

IRNet: A General Purpose Deep Residual Regression Framework for Materials Discovery

Dipendra Jha , Logan Ward , Zijiang Yang , Christopher Wolverton , Ian Foster , Wei-keng Liao , Alok Choudhary , Ankit Agrawal This is my paper

Pith reviewed 2026-05-25 01:37 UTC · model grok-4.3

classification ⚛️ physics.comp-ph cs.LGstat.ML
keywords materials discoverydeep residual networksregressionproperty predictionOQMDMaterials Projectcrystal structureneural networks
0
0 comments X

The pith

IRNet uses residual shortcuts after every layer to achieve higher accuracy predicting inorganic materials properties than current machine learning methods.

A machine-rendered reading of the paper's core claim, the machinery that carries it, and where it could break.

The paper introduces IRNet, a deep neural network for regression that places shortcut connections after each fully connected layer so every layer learns a residual mapping. This addresses the vanishing gradient issue that limits depth in standard networks when the input is a numerical vector of composition and crystal structure attributes. On multiple datasets from OQMD and Materials Project, IRNet delivers better prediction performance for materials properties than the machine learning approaches currently used by domain scientists. It also reaches better training convergence than placing shortcuts over multi-layer stacks while using the same number of parameters. A reader would care because more accurate property predictions can speed up the search for materials with targeted characteristics.

Core claim

IRNet is a deep regression network composed of fully connected layers with individual residual learning, where shortcut connections are placed after each layer so that each layer learns the residual mapping between its output and input. When applied to learning properties of inorganic materials from numerical attributes derived from material composition and crystal structure, and evaluated on multiple datasets from the Open Quantum Materials Database and Materials Project, IRNet provides significantly better prediction performance than the state-of-the-art machine learning approaches currently used by domain scientists. IRNet's individual residual learning also leads to better convergence in

What carries the argument

individual residual learning, which places shortcut connections after each layer so each layer learns the residual mapping between its output and input

If this is right

  • Deeper fully connected networks become practical for regression on numerical material descriptors without gradient vanishing.
  • Training time decreases because convergence improves while parameter count stays fixed.
  • Property predictions on existing databases become more reliable for guiding experiments.
  • The same network structure can be reused across different material properties without major redesign.

Where Pith is reading between the lines

These are editorial extensions of the paper, not claims the author makes directly.

  • The approach could transfer to other scientific regression tasks that use fixed-length numerical feature vectors.
  • It may reduce sensitivity to exact depth choices in network design for tabular scientific data.
  • Combining individual residuals with existing materials featurizers could be tested directly on new datasets.

Load-bearing premise

The performance advantage is caused by the individual residual connections rather than differences in hyperparameter tuning, data preprocessing, or training procedure details.

What would settle it

Train two networks on the same OQMD dataset with identical hyperparameters and preprocessing, differing only in whether shortcuts follow each layer or multi-layer stacks, and measure whether prediction error on held-out data shows a clear gap.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 1907.03222 by Alok Choudhary, Ankit Agrawal, Christopher Wolverton, Dipendra Jha, Ian Foster, Logan Ward, Wei-keng Liao, Zijiang Yang.

Figure 1
Figure 1. Figure 1: ‡ree types of 17-layer networks. Each “layer” is a [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p003_1.png] view at source ↗
Figure 2
Figure 2. Figure 2: Test error curve for various plain networks for the [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p005_2.png] view at source ↗
Figure 3
Figure 3. Figure 3: Test error curve for deeper plain networks for the [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p005_3.png] view at source ↗
Figure 4
Figure 4. Figure 4: Impact on residual learning for the design problem. Both residual networks outperform the plain network, and the individual network outperforms the stacked network for all depths of network. We observe similar trends even in the case of training error curves for all types of networks of all depths; the IRNet converges faster than the SRNet and Plain Network for all depths [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig… view at source ↗
Figure 5
Figure 5. Figure 5: Cumulative distribution function (CDF) of the pre [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p007_5.png] view at source ↗
read the original abstract

Materials discovery is crucial for making scientific advances in many domains. Collections of data from experiments and first-principle computations have spurred interest in applying machine learning methods to create predictive models capable of mapping from composition and crystal structures to materials properties. Generally, these are regression problems with the input being a 1D vector composed of numerical attributes representing the material composition and/or crystal structure. While neural networks consisting of fully connected layers have been applied to such problems, their performance often suffers from the vanishing gradient problem when network depth is increased. In this paper, we study and propose design principles for building deep regression networks composed of fully connected layers with numerical vectors as input. We introduce a novel deep regression network with individual residual learning, IRNet, that places shortcut connections after each layer so that each layer learns the residual mapping between its output and input. We use the problem of learning properties of inorganic materials from numerical attributes derived from material composition and/or crystal structure to compare IRNet's performance against that of other machine learning techniques. Using multiple datasets from the Open Quantum Materials Database (OQMD) and Materials Project for training and evaluation, we show that IRNet provides significantly better prediction performance than the state-of-the-art machine learning approaches currently used by domain scientists. We also show that IRNet's use of individual residual learning leads to better convergence during the training phase than when shortcut connections are between multi-layer stacks while maintaining the same number of parameters.

Editorial analysis

A structured set of objections, weighed in public.

Desk editor's note, referee report, simulated authors' rebuttal, and a circularity audit. Tearing a paper down is the easy half of reading it; the pith above is the substance, this is the friction.

Referee Report

2 major / 2 minor

Summary. The manuscript introduces IRNet, a deep fully-connected regression network that inserts individual residual (shortcut) connections after every layer so that each layer learns a residual mapping. On multiple regression tasks drawn from OQMD and Materials Project datasets, the authors claim that IRNet achieves significantly higher predictive accuracy than the machine-learning methods currently used by domain scientists and converges faster than conventional multi-layer residual stacks at matched parameter count.

Significance. If the reported gains are shown to arise from the architectural choice rather than from unequal hyper-parameter effort or preprocessing, IRNet would supply a practical, general-purpose deep-regression template for composition- and structure-based materials-property prediction, directly addressing the vanishing-gradient limitation of plain deep FC networks in this domain.

major comments (2)
  1. [§4] §4 (Experimental results) and the associated tables: the comparisons against random forests, standard DNNs, and other published baselines do not document that identical data splits, feature scaling, optimizer schedules, and hyper-parameter search budgets were used for every method. Without matched experimental conditions the performance delta cannot be attributed to the individual-residual design.
  2. [§3.2 and §4.3] §3.2 (IRNet architecture) and §4.3 (convergence comparison): the claim that individual residuals yield better convergence than multi-layer residual stacks at fixed parameter count is presented without an ablation that isolates the placement of shortcuts from other training details (learning-rate schedule, initialization, batch size).
minor comments (2)
  1. [Abstract] Abstract: the phrase “significantly better prediction performance” is not accompanied by any numerical values or statistical tests; adding at least one representative MAE or R² figure would strengthen the claim.
  2. [§3] Notation: the manuscript uses “individual residual learning” without a concise mathematical definition (e.g., an equation showing the forward pass with per-layer shortcuts); adding such an equation in §3 would improve clarity.

Simulated Author's Rebuttal

2 responses · 0 unresolved

We thank the referee for the constructive comments. We address each major point below and will revise the manuscript accordingly to strengthen the experimental claims.

read point-by-point responses

  1. Referee: [§4] §4 (Experimental results) and the associated tables: the comparisons against random forests, standard DNNs, and other published baselines do not document that identical data splits, feature scaling, optimizer schedules, and hyper-parameter search budgets were used for every method. Without matched experimental conditions the performance delta cannot be attributed to the individual-residual design.

    Authors: We acknowledge that the manuscript does not explicitly document identical experimental conditions across all baselines. Our original comparisons followed the protocols and data splits reported in the source papers for each baseline method on the OQMD and Materials Project datasets. To ensure the performance gains can be attributed to the IRNet architecture, we will add a new set of controlled experiments in the revision that use a single unified preprocessing pipeline, identical train/test splits, the same optimizer schedule, and a matched hyper-parameter search budget for every method, including random forests and standard DNNs. revision: yes

  2. Referee: [§3.2 and §4.3] §3.2 (IRNet architecture) and §4.3 (convergence comparison): the claim that individual residuals yield better convergence than multi-layer residual stacks at fixed parameter count is presented without an ablation that isolates the placement of shortcuts from other training details (learning-rate schedule, initialization, batch size).

    Authors: We agree that an ablation isolating shortcut placement from other training details would strengthen the convergence claim. The current §4.3 comparison holds parameter count fixed but does not vary only the residual placement while freezing learning-rate schedule, initialization, and batch size. We will include this controlled ablation in the revised manuscript, training both per-layer and multi-layer residual variants under identical training hyperparameters to demonstrate that the individual-residual design drives the observed convergence improvement. revision: yes

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged

No derivation chain present; empirical ML evaluation on public benchmarks.

full rationale

The paper proposes IRNet, a fully-connected residual network architecture for regression tasks on materials composition/structure vectors, and reports test-set performance on public OQMD and Materials Project datasets. No equations, first-principles derivations, fitted parameters renamed as predictions, or uniqueness theorems appear in the abstract or described claims. All performance assertions are external comparisons against published baselines on fixed, publicly available data splits; the central claim therefore does not reduce to any self-referential input by construction. Self-citation is absent from the load-bearing steps. This is the normal case of an empirical methods paper whose validity is testable outside its own fitted values.

Axiom & Free-Parameter Ledger

0 free parameters · 1 axioms · 1 invented entities

The paper relies on standard assumptions about input featurization and dataset quality; no free parameters or invented physical entities are introduced beyond the network architecture itself.

axioms (1)
  • domain assumption Numerical vectors derived from composition and crystal structure are sufficient to represent materials for property regression
    Stated in the abstract as the input representation used for all compared methods.
invented entities (1)
  • IRNet with individual residual learning no independent evidence
    purpose: To enable deeper fully connected regression networks without vanishing gradients
    New architecture proposed in the paper; no independent evidence outside the empirical results is provided.

pith-pipeline@v0.9.0 · 5816 in / 1244 out tokens · 20480 ms · 2026-05-25T01:37:35.327157+00:00 · methodology

discussion (0)

Sign in with ORCID, Apple, or X to comment. Anyone can read and Pith papers without signing in.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

58 extracted references · 58 canonical work pages · 7 internal anchors

  1. [1]

    Materials Genome Initiative

    2016. Materials Genome Initiative. h/t_tps://www.whitehouse.gov/mgi

    work page 2016

  2. [2]

    Mart´ın Abadi, Ashish Agarwal, Paul Barham, Eugene Brevdo, Zhifeng Chen, Craig Citro, Greg S Corrado, Andy Davis, Jeffrey Dean, Ma/t_thieu Devin, et al

    work page

  3. [3]

    TensorFlow: Large-Scale Machine Learning on Heterogeneous Distributed Systems

    Tensor/f_low: Large-scale machine learning on heterogeneous distributed systems. arXiv preprint arXiv:1603.04467 (2016)

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv 2016

  4. [4]

    fourth paradigm

    Ankit Agrawal and Alok Choudhary. 2016. Perspective: Materials informatics and big data: Realization of the “fourth paradigm” of science in materials science. APL Materials 4, 5 (2016), 053208

    work page 2016

  5. [5]

    Yoshua Bengio, Patrice Simard, and Paolo Frasconi. 1994. Learning long-term dependencies with gradient descent is difficult. IEEE transactions on neural networks 5, 2 (1994), 157–166

    work page 1994

  6. [6]

    Bergerhoff, R

    G. Bergerhoff, R. Hundt, R. Sievers, and I. D. Brown. 1983. /T_he inor- ganic crystal structure data base. Journal of Chemical Information and Computer Sciences 23, 2 (1983), 66–69. h/t_tps://doi.org/10.1021/ci00038a003 arXiv:h/t_tp://dx.doi.org/10.1021/ci00038a003

    work page doi:10.1021/ci00038a003 1983

  7. [7]

    B Blaiszik, K Chard, J Pruyne, R Ananthakrishnan, S Tuecke, and I Foster. 2016. /T_he Materials Data Facility: Data services to advance materials science research. JOM 68, 8 (2016), 2045–2052

    work page 2016

  8. [8]

    Wouter Boomsma and Jes Frellsen. 2017. Spherical convolutions and their application in molecular modelling. In Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems. 3433–3443

    work page 2017

  9. [9]

    Venkatesh Botu and Rampi Ramprasad. 2015. Adaptive machine learning frame- work to accelerate ab initio molecular dynamics. International Journal of /Q_uan- tum Chemistry 115, 16 (2015), 1074–1083

    work page 2015

  10. [10]

    Ward, Yadu N

    Ryan Chard, Zhuozhao Li, Kyle Chard, Logan T. Ward, Yadu N. Babuji, Anna Woodard, Steven Tuecke, Ben Blaiszik, Michael J. Franklin, and Ian T. Foster

    work page

  11. [11]

    In 33rd IEEE International Parallel and Distributed Processing Symposium

    DLHub: Model and data serving for science. In 33rd IEEE International Parallel and Distributed Processing Symposium

    work page

  12. [12]

    Stefano Curtarolo, Gus LW Hart, Marco Buongiorno Nardelli, Natalio Mingo, Stefano Sanvito, and Ohad Levy. 2013. /T_he high-throughput highway to compu- tational materials design. Nature materials 12, 3 (2013), 191

    work page 2013

  13. [13]

    Alden Dima, Sunil Bhaskarla, Chandler Becker, Mary Brady, Carelyn Campbell, Philippe Dessauw, Robert Hanisch, Ursula Ka/t_tner, Kenneth Kroenlein, Marcus IRNet: A General Purpose Deep Residual Regression Framework for Materials Discovery KDD ’19, August 4–8, 2019, Anchorage, AK, USA Newrock, et al . 2016. Informatics infrastructure for the Materials Genom...

    work page 2019

  14. [14]

    Felix Faber, Alexander Lindmaa, O Anatole von Lilienfeld, and Rickard Armiento

    work page

  15. [15]

    International Journal of /Q_uantum Chemistry115, 16 (2015), 1094–1101

    Crystal structure representations for machine learning models of formation energies. International Journal of /Q_uantum Chemistry115, 16 (2015), 1094–1101

    work page 2015

  16. [16]

    Felix A Faber, Alexander Lindmaa, O Anatole Von Lilienfeld, and Rickard Armiento. 2016. Machine Learning Energies of 2 Million Elpasolite (A B C 2 D 6) Crystals. Physical review le/t_ters117, 13 (2016), 135502

    work page 2016

  17. [17]

    Luca M Ghiringhelli, Jan Vybiral, Sergey V Levchenko, Claudia Draxl, and Ma/t_thias Scheffler. 2015. Big data of materials science: Critical role of the descriptor. Physical review le/t_ters114, 10 (2015), 105503

    work page 2015

  18. [18]

    Xavier Glorot and Yoshua Bengio. 2010. Understanding the difficulty of training deep feedforward neural networks. In Proceedings of the thirteenth international conference on arti/f_icial intelligence and statistics. 249–256

    work page 2010

  19. [19]

    Garre/t_t B Goh, Nathan O Hodas, Charles Siegel, and Abhinav Vishnu. 2017. SMILES2Vec: An Interpretable General-Purpose Deep Neural Network for Pre- dicting Chemical Properties. arXiv preprint arXiv:1712.02034 (2017)

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv 2017

  20. [20]

    Fast and Accurate Modeling of Molecular Atomization Energies with Machine Learning

    Katja Hansen, Franziska Biegler, Raghunathan Ramakrishnan, Wiktor Prono- bis, O. Anatole Von Lilienfeld, Klaus-Robert Robert M ¨uller, and Alexandre Tkatchenko. 2015. Machine Learning Predictions of Molecular Properties: Accu- rate Many-Body Potentials and Nonlocality in Chemical Space. /T_he Journal of Physical Chemistry Le/t_ters6, 12 (jun 2015), 2326–2...

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv 2015

  21. [21]

    Kaiming He, Xiangyu Zhang, Shaoqing Ren, and Jian Sun. 2016. Deep residual learning for image recognition. In Proceedings of the IEEE conference on computer vision and pa/t_tern recognition. 770–778

    work page 2016

  22. [22]

    Gao Huang, Zhuang Liu, Laurens Van Der Maaten, and Kilian Q Weinberger

    work page

  23. [23]

    In Proceedings of the IEEE conference on computer vision and pa/t_tern recognition

    Densely connected convolutional networks. In Proceedings of the IEEE conference on computer vision and pa/t_tern recognition. 4700–4708

    work page

  24. [24]

    Lu Huang, Ji Xu, Jiasong Sun, and Yi Yang. 2017. An improved residual LSTM architecture for acoustic modeling. In Computer and Communication Systems (ICCCS), 2017 2nd International Conference on . IEEE, 101–105

    work page 2017

  25. [25]

    Sergey Ioffe and Christian Szegedy. 2015. Batch normalization: Accelerating deep network training by reducing internal covariate shi/f_t. arXiv preprint arXiv:1502.03167 (2015)

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv 2015

  26. [26]

    Anubhav Jain, Shyue Ping Ong, Geoffroy Hautier, Wei Chen, William Davidson Richards, Stephen Dacek, Shreyas Cholia, Dan Gunter, David Skinner, Gerbrand Ceder, and Kristin a. Persson. 2013. /T_he Materials Project: A materials genome approach to accelerating materials innovation. APL Materials 1, 1 (2013), 011002. h/t_tps://doi.org/10.1063/1.4812323

    work page doi:10.1063/1.4812323 2013

  27. [27]

    Dipendra Jha, Saransh Singh, Reda Al-Bahrani, Wei-keng Liao, Alok Choudhary, Marc De Graef, and Ankit Agrawal. 2018. Extracting grain orientations from ebsd pa/t_terns of polycrystalline materials using convolutional neural networks. Microscopy and Microanalysis 24, 5 (2018), 497–502

    work page 2018

  28. [28]

    Dipendra Jha, Logan Ward, Arindam Paul, Wei-keng Liao, Alok Choudhary, Chris Wolverton, and Ankit Agrawal. 2018. ElemNet: Deep Learning the Chemistry of Materials From Only Elemental Composition. Scienti/f_ic reports8, 1 (2018), 17593

    work page 2018

  29. [29]

    Surya R Kalidindi. 2015. Data science and cyberinfrastructure: critical enablers for accelerated development of hierarchical materials. International Materials Reviews 60, 3 (2015), 150–168

    work page 2015

  30. [30]

    Diederik P Kingma and Jimmy Ba. 2014. Adam: A method for stochastic opti- mization. arXiv preprint arXiv:1412.6980 (2014)

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv 2014

  31. [31]

    Sco/t_t Kirklin, James E Saal, Bryce Meredig, Alex /T_hompson, Jeff W Doak, Mu- ratahan Aykol, Stephan R¨uhl, and Chris Wolverton. 2015. /T_he Open /Q_uantum Materials Database (OQMD): assessing the accuracy of DFT formation energies. npj Computational Materials 1 (2015), 15010

    work page 2015

  32. [32]

    Ruoqian Liu, Abhishek Kumar, Zhengzhang Chen, Ankit Agrawal, Veera Sun- dararaghavan, and Alok Choudhary. 2015. A predictive machine learning ap- proach for microstructure optimization and materials design. Scienti/f_ic reports5 (2015)

    work page 2015

  33. [33]

    Bryce Meredig, Ankit Agrawal, Sco/t_t Kirklin, James E Saal, JW Doak, A /T_homp- son, Kunpeng Zhang, Alok Choudhary, and Christopher Wolverton. 2014. Com- binatorial screening for new materials in unconstrained composition space with machine learning. Physical Review B 89, 9 (2014), 094104

    work page 2014

  34. [34]

    Gr´egoire Montavon, Ma/t_thias Rupp, Vivekanand Gobre, Alvaro Vazquez- Mayagoitia, Katja Hansen, Alexandre Tkatchenko, Klaus-Robert M ¨uller, and O Anatole von Lilienfeld. 2013. Machine learning of molecular electronic prop- erties in chemical compound space. New Journal of Physics 15, 9 (2013), 095003

    work page 2013

  35. [35]

    Vinod Nair and Geoffrey E Hinton. 2010. Recti/f_ied linear units improve re- stricted boltzmann machines. In Proceedings of the 27th International Conference on Machine Learning (ICML-10) . 807–814

    work page 2010

  36. [36]

    N M Nusran, K R Joshi, K Cho, M A Tanatar, W R Meier, S L Bud’ko, P C Can/f_ield, Y Liu, T A Lograsso, and R Prozorov. 2018. Spatially-resolved study of the Meissner effect in superconductors using NV-centers-in-diamond optical magnetometry. New Journal of Physics 20, 4 (2018), 043010. h/t_tp://stacks.iop. org/1367-2630/20/i=4/a=043010

    work page 2018

  37. [37]

    David W Oxtoby, H Pat Gillis, and Laurie J Butler. 2015. Principles of modern chemistry. Cengage Learning

    work page 2015

  38. [38]

    Arindam Paul, Dipendra Jha, Reda Al-Bahrani, Wei-keng Liao, Alok Choudhary, and Ankit Agrawal. 2018. CheMixNet: Mixed DNN Architectures for Predicting Chemical Properties using Multiple Molecular Representations. In Proceedings of the Workshop on Molecules and Materials at the 32nd Conference on Neural Information Processing Systems

    work page 2018

  39. [39]

    Pedregosa, G

    F. Pedregosa, G. Varoquaux, A. Gramfort, V. Michel, B. /T_hirion, O. Grisel, M. Blondel, P. Pre/t_tenhofer, R. Weiss, V. Dubourg, J. Vanderplas, A. Passos, D. Cour- napeau, M. Brucher, M. Perrot, and E. Duchesnay. 2011. Scikit-learn: Machine Learning in Python. Journal of Machine Learning Research 12 (2011), 2825–2830

    work page 2011

  40. [40]

    Edward O Pyzer-Knapp, Kewei Li, and Alan Aspuru-Guzik. 2015. Learning from the harvard clean energy project: /T_he use of neural networks to accelerate materials discovery. Advanced Functional Materials 25, 41 (2015), 6495–6502

    work page 2015

  41. [41]

    Zhao Qin, Gang Seob Jung, Min Jeong Kang, and Markus J Buehler. 2017. /T_he mechanics and design of a lightweight three-dimensional graphene assembly. Science advances 3, 1 (2017), e1601536

    work page 2017

  42. [42]

    Krishna Rajan. 2015. Materials informatics: /T_he materials “gene” and big data. Annual Review of Materials Research 45 (2015), 153–169

    work page 2015

  43. [43]

    Rampi Ramprasad, Rohit Batra, Ghanshyam Pilania, Arun Mannodi- Kanakkithodi, and Chiho Kim. 2017. Machine learning in materials informatics: recent applications and prospects. npj Computational Materials 3, 1 (dec 2017),

    work page 2017

  44. [44]

    h/t_tps://doi.org/10.1038/s41524-017-0056-5

    work page doi:10.1038/s41524-017-0056-5

  45. [45]

    KT Sch¨u/t_t, H Glawe, F Brockherde, A Sanna, KR M¨uller, and EKU Gross. 2014. How to represent crystal structures for machine learning: Towards fast prediction of electronic properties. Physical Review B 89, 20 (2014), 205118

    work page 2014

  46. [46]

    SchNet - a deep learning architecture for molecules and materials

    Kristof T. Sch ¨u/t_t, Huziel E. Sauceda, Pieter-Jan Kindermans, Alexandre Tkatchenko, and Klaus-Robert M ¨uller. 2017. SchNet - a deep learning archi- tecture for molecules and materials. (2017), 1–10. arXiv:1712.06113 h/t_tp: //arxiv.org/abs/1712.06113

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv 2017

  47. [47]

    Atsuto Seko, Hiroyuki Hayashi, Keita Nakayama, Akira Takahashi, and Isao Tanaka. 2017. Representation of compounds for machine-learning prediction of physical properties. Physical Review B 95, 14 (2017), 144110

    work page 2017

  48. [48]

    Rupesh K Srivastava, Klaus Greff, and J¨urgen Schmidhuber. 2015. Training very deep networks. In Advances in neural information processing systems . 2377–2385

    work page 2015

  49. [49]

    Christian Szegedy, Sergey Ioffe, Vincent Vanhoucke, and Alexander A Alemi

    work page

  50. [50]

    In AAAI, Vol

    Inception-v4, inception-resnet and the impact of residual connections on learning.. In AAAI, Vol. 4. 12

    work page

  51. [51]

    Christian Szegedy, Wei Liu, Yangqing Jia, Pierre Sermanet, Sco/t_t Reed, Dragomir Anguelov, Dumitru Erhan, Vincent Vanhoucke, and Andrew Rabinovich. 2015. Going deeper with convolutions. In Proceedings of the IEEE Conference on Com- puter Vision and Pa/t_tern Recognition. 1–9

    work page 2015

  52. [52]

    Yiren Wang and Fei Tian. 2016. Recurrent residual learning for sequence classi- /f_ication. InProceedings of the 2016 Conference on Empirical Methods in Natural Language Processing. 938–943

    work page 2016

  53. [53]

    Logan Ward, Ankit Agrawal, Alok Choudhary, and Christopher Wolverton. 2016. A General-Purpose Machine Learning Framework for Predicting Properties of Inorganic Materials. npj Computational Materials 2, August (2016), 16028. h/t_tps://doi.org/10.1038/npjcompumats.2016.28 arXiv:1606.09551

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv doi:10.1038/npjcompumats.2016.28 2016

  54. [54]

    Logan Ward, Ruoqian Liu, Amar Krishna, Vinay I Hegde, Ankit Agrawal, Alok Choudhary, and Chris Wolverton. 2017. Including crystal structure a/t_tributes in machine learning models of formation energies via Voronoi tessellations. Physical Review B 96, 2 (2017), 024104

    work page 2017

  55. [55]

    Logan Ward and Chris Wolverton. 2016. Atomistic calculations and materials informatics: A review. Current Opinion in Solid State and Materials Science (2016)

    work page 2016

  56. [56]

    Saining Xie, Ross Girshick, Piotr Doll ´ar, Zhuowen Tu, and Kaiming He. 2017. Aggregated residual transformations for deep neural networks. In Computer Vision and Pa/t_tern Recognition (CVPR), 2017 IEEE Conference on. IEEE, 5987–5995

    work page 2017

  57. [57]

    Dezhen Xue, Prasanna V Balachandran, John Hogden, James /T_heiler, Deqing Xue, and Turab Lookman. 2016. Accelerated search for materials with targeted properties by adaptive design. Nature communications 7 (2016)

    work page 2016

  58. [58]

    /Q_uan Zhou, Peizhe Tang, Shenxiu Liu, Jinbo Pan, Qimin Yan, and Shou-Cheng Zhang. 2018. Learning atoms for materials discovery. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences 115, 28 (2018), E6411–E6417

    work page 2018