Paolo Climaco

LG
h-index2
3papers
4citations
Novelty52%
AI Score33

3 Papers

CHEM-PHJun 15, 2023
On the Interplay of Subset Selection and Informed Graph Neural Networks

Niklas Breustedt, Paolo Climaco, Jochen Garcke et al.

Machine learning techniques paired with the availability of massive datasets dramatically enhance our ability to explore the chemical compound space by providing fast and accurate predictions of molecular properties. However, learning on large datasets is strongly limited by the availability of computational resources and can be infeasible in some scenarios. Moreover, the instances in the datasets may not yet be labelled and generating the labels can be costly, as in the case of quantum chemistry computations. Thus, there is a need to select small training subsets from large pools of unlabelled data points and to develop reliable ML methods that can effectively learn from small training sets. This work focuses on predicting the molecules atomization energy in the QM9 dataset. We investigate the advantages of employing domain knowledge-based data sampling methods for an efficient training set selection combined with informed ML techniques. In particular, we show how maximizing molecular diversity in the training set selection process increases the robustness of linear and nonlinear regression techniques such as kernel methods and graph neural networks. We also check the reliability of the predictions made by the graph neural network with a model-agnostic explainer based on the rate distortion explanation framework.

LGJul 20, 2023
On minimizing the training set fill distance in machine learning regression

Paolo Climaco, Jochen Garcke

For regression tasks one often leverages large datasets for training predictive machine learning models. However, using large datasets may not be feasible due to computational limitations or high data labelling costs. Therefore, suitably selecting small training sets from large pools of unlabelled data points is essential to maximize model performance while maintaining efficiency. In this work, we study Farthest Point Sampling (FPS), a data selection approach that aims to minimize the fill distance of the selected set. We derive an upper bound for the maximum expected prediction error, conditional to the location of the unlabelled data points, that linearly depends on the training set fill distance. For empirical validation, we perform experiments using two regression models on three datasets. We empirically show that selecting a training set by aiming to minimize the fill distance, thereby minimizing our derived bound, significantly reduces the maximum prediction error of various regression models, outperforming alternative sampling approaches by a large margin. Furthermore, we show that selecting training sets with the FPS can also increase model stability for the specific case of Gaussian kernel regression approaches.

LGSep 16, 2025
Density-Aware Farthest Point Sampling

Paolo Climaco, Jochen Garcke

We focus on training machine learning regression models in scenarios where the availability of labeled training data is limited due to computational constraints or high labeling costs. Thus, selecting suitable training sets from unlabeled data is essential for balancing performance and efficiency. For the selection of the training data, we focus on passive and model-agnostic sampling methods that only consider the data feature representations. We derive an upper bound for the expected prediction error of Lipschitz continuous regression models that linearly depends on the weighted fill distance of the training set, a quantity we can estimate simply by considering the data features. We introduce "Density-Aware Farthest Point Sampling" (DA-FPS), a novel sampling method. We prove that DA-FPS provides approximate minimizers for a data-driven estimation of the weighted fill distance, thereby aiming at minimizing our derived bound. We conduct experiments using two regression models across three datasets. The results demonstrate that DA-FPS significantly reduces the mean absolute prediction error compared to other sampling strategies.