  Neural networks (NNs) often assign high confidence to their predictions, even
for points far out-of-distribution, making uncertainty quantification (UQ) a
challenge. When they are employed to model interatomic potentials in materials
systems, this problem leads to unphysical structures that disrupt simulations,
or to biased statistics and dynamics that do not reflect the true physics.
Differentiable UQ techniques can find new informative data and drive active
learning loops for robust potentials. However, a variety of UQ techniques,
including newly developed ones, exist for atomistic simulations and there are
no clear guidelines for which are most effective or suitable for a given case.
In this work, we examine multiple UQ schemes for improving the robustness of NN
interatomic potentials (NNIPs) through active learning. In particular, we
compare incumbent ensemble-based methods against strategies that use single,
deterministic NNs: mean-variance estimation, deep evidential regression, and
Gaussian mixture models. We explore three datasets ranging from in-domain
interpolative learning to more extrapolative out-of-domain generalization
challenges: rMD17, ammonia inversion, and bulk silica glass. Performance is
measured across multiple metrics relating model error to uncertainty. Our
experiments show that none of the methods consistently outperformed each other
across the various metrics. Ensembling remained better at generalization and
for NNIP robustness; MVE only proved effective for in-domain interpolation,
while GMM was better out-of-domain; and evidential regression, despite its
promise, was not the preferable alternative in any of the cases. More broadly,
cost-effective, single deterministic models cannot yet consistently match or
outperform ensembling for uncertainty quantification in NNIPs.
