Loading
Life sciences · Preprint
arXiv · October 26, 2026
No summary has been generated for this record yet. What follows is drawn from its source metadata only.
Preprint.
No findings were extractable from the material analysed.
Safety was not reported in the material analysed. Check the source before drawing any conclusion about harm.
The source did not state who this applies to in practice.
Graded across the dimensions that decide whether you should act, each from what the source actually supports. There is no single score, and where a dimension was not assessed it says so.
This record has not been graded across any dimension yet. Treat the label above as provisional and read the source.
What is missing. This record has no bottom line, key findings, reported figures, evidence dimensions. That is a gap in the analysis, not a judgement about the study.
Multi-fidelity training, which combines abundant low-fidelity data with scarce high-fidelity labels, is increasingly common in atomistic modeling, but its effect on predictive uncertainty remains largely unexplored. We investigate this question using deep ensembles of mean-variance MACE models trained on ANI-1x, contrasting high-fidelity training from scratch with low-fidelity pretraining followed by fine-tuning. We characterize aleatoric, epistemic, and total uncertainty throughout training and under two distribution shifts: unseen molecular systems and higher-energy configurations. We find that pretraining reduces prediction error and improves uncertainty-based ranking across all test sets, but does not yield well-calibrated predictive variances; calibration deteriorates more severely under energy extrapolation. Training-dynamics analysis localizes most of this calibration degradation to high-fidelity optimization, during which the learned aleatoric variance becomes overconfident on held-out data. Moreover, multi-fidelity fine-tuning produces a more effective uncertainty-based acquisition function than high-fidelity training from scratch. These findings show that uncertainty ranking and calibration capture distinct properties and must be assessed separately in multi-fidelity atomistic models, especially under extrapolation.