Skip to main content
  1. Home
  2. Computing
  3. News

Computational models are getting better, and worse, at predicting electron behavior

Add as a preferred source on Google

An international group of researchers, working on complex computer models for predicting the behavior of electrons, has discovered that those very computational models might not be as accurate as they should be. In fact, as the computers used to model atoms get smarter, they might actually be getting worse at their jobs.

Let’s take a step back. Devices we use in our everyday lives are getting smarter with every passing day — just ask Alexa or Siri. These are just two systems built on complex algorithms that analyze vast amounts of data in the blink of an eye in order to answer your questions or start up that Holiday Pop playlist on Spotify. These are relatively simple tasks, but requesting that a computer system perform them autonomously requires immense computational power.

Recommended Videos

The kind of algorithms necessary to perform those simple tasks are very complicated, as they need to analyze natural language and compare that input to an immense array of data in order to figure out what you’re asking for. However, these smart, “artificial intelligence” algorithms pale in comparison to the algorithms researchers use to model the fundamental workings of an atom or molecule.

Researchers use algorithms to determine the behavior of electrons in various complex materials, and even today predicting the behavior of electrons is only possible for very simple atoms. These algorithms were built to estimate the energy and electron density of particular atoms, using a mathematical theory which scales from single atoms to complex materials. According to Ars Technica, a team of Russian-U.S. researchers set about putting those models to the test.

When the researchers started comparing various algorithms used to model the density and energy of atoms, they discovered that the systems were getting better and better at estimating the energy of a particular atom, but as they progressed, they became worse at estimating the electron density of that same atom.

According to Ars Technica’s science editor, this is a function of the algorithms’ ability to model electrons based on empirical evidence — plugging in real-world values instead of estimated values seems to have a negative effect on the accuracy of these computer models.

The solution? Well, that depends on your area of research. If you need accurate electron density you might want to use an algorithm based on functions with “little or no empiricism” but if you need accurate energy calculations, you’d be better off using a “highly empirical” algorithm.

It’s a fascinating discovery and an important reminder that our most complex and powerful computer systems still have trouble modeling the most fundamental structures of the universe.

Jaina Grey
Former Digital Trends Contributor
Jaina Grey is a Seattle-based journalist with over a decade of experience covering technology, coffee, gaming, and AI. Her…
US banks want to block AI agents from moving your money. Well, at least that’s one good move.
Letting a chatbot handle your finances sounds convenient until someone asks who pays for its mistakes.
ai-agents-on-phone

AI agents want to handle more of your life, including your money, but US banks are drawing a line when these AI assistants try to move funds on your behalf. Charles Schwab and JPMorgan Chase are now restricting outside AI agents from taking financial actions, citing security risks and unanswered questions about who takes responsibility when things go wrong.

Charles Schwab CEO Rick Wurster told Bloomberg that Schwab is actively blocking unauthorized AI agents, including Meta's Muse, from moving client money. JPMorgan Chase CEO Jamie Dimon made a similar call this week, so this isn't just one bank being cautious.

Read more
MapQuest can now show you the cameras keeping an eye on your commute
MapQuest is back, and now it’s exposing who’s watching your neighbourhood
Surveillance cameras

MapQuest has introduced a new surveillance layer that lets users see the reported locations of outdoor surveillance cameras and automated licence plate readers, including those operated by Flock Safety. The feature gives drivers and residents a clearer picture of the surveillance infrastructure around their neighbourhoods, at a time when law enforcement's use of these cameras is under growing scrutiny.

The new layer can be enabled through MapQuest’s Map Options menu, alongside existing options for traffic and incidents. It covers cameras from multiple manufacturers, including Motorola Solutions, Genetec, Axis Communications, Axon, Leonardo, Neology, Rekor, PlateSmart, Ubicquia and Verkada. The company has promoted the feature with the tagline “The Roads Have Eyes!”

Read more
OpenAI’s agent ran out of crypto while completing a task, so it stole from another wallet
When its test crypto ran dry, this AI agent went wallet shopping without asking first.
open ai logo on mac

Imagine asking your assistant to finish a task, only to find out it paid for it with someone else's money. That's basically what happened, according to OpenAI's incident report. The incident happened on June 26 and involved an internal research model from the GPT-5.6 Sol family.

Apparently, the AI agent ran out of cryptocurrency while trying to finish a coding task. So it completed the task in a way nobody approved.

Read more