Physics-Guided Graph Neural Networks for Interpretable Active-Site Evolution Prediction in Water Oxidation Catalysts
Keywords:
physics-guided machine learning, graph neural networks, water oxidation, active-site evolution, interpretability, sustainable catalysisAbstract
Water oxidation is a cornerstone reaction for renewable energy storage and sustainable hydrogen production, yet the rational design of efficient and durable catalysts remains constrained by an incomplete understanding of how active sites dynamically restructure under operating conditions. Physics-guided graph neural networks offer a transformative framework to bridge this gap, integrating first-principles physical constraints with data-driven learning to predict the structural and electronic evolution of catalytic surfaces. This paper presents a systems-level examination of such a hybrid modeling paradigm, focusing on the architecture, interpretability mechanisms, data infrastructure, and deployment strategies that underpin reliable active-site evolution predictions. We discuss how graph neural networks encode atomistic environments as graph structures whose nodes and edges capture coordination chemistry and electronic interactions, while physics-guided regularizations enforce thermodynamic and spectroscopic consistency. Special attention is devoted to interpretability, enabling researchers to trace which structural motifs and electronic signatures drive activity, including operando spectroscopic fingerprints such as the formation of Zhang-Rice singlet states. The discussion extends to data governance, emphasizing the need for FAIR-compliant data ecosystems that amalgamate high-throughput experiments, density functional theory calculations, and real-time spectroscopy. Robustness against distributional shifts, fairness in catalyst discovery across material families, and the sustainability implications of AI-accelerated catalyst pipelines are addressed as cross-cutting concerns. Finally, policy considerations surrounding open science, intellectual property, and equitable access to AI tools for the global energy transition are explored. The paper argues that a tightly coupled socio-technical infrastructure, where domain-informed model architecture and transparent governance coexist, is essential for translating physics-guided graph neural networks from laboratory proof-of-concept to impactful, field-deployable decision-support systems.
References
1. Seh, Z. W., Kibsgaard, J., Dickens, C. F., Chorkendorff, I., Nørskov, J. K., & Jaramillo, T. F. (2017). Combining theory and experiment in electrocatalysis: Insights into materials design. Science, 355(6321), eaad4998.
2. Xie, T., & Grossman, J. C. (2018). Crystal graph convolutional neural networks for an accurate and interpretable prediction of material properties. Physical Review Letters, 120(14), 145301.
3. Raissi, M., Perdikaris, P., & Karniadakis, G. E. (2019). Physics-informed neural networks: A deep learning framework for solving forward and inverse problems involving nonlinear partial differential equations. Journal of Computational Physics, 378, 686–707.
4. Doshi-Velez, F., & Kim, B. (2017). Towards a rigorous science of interpretable machine learning. arXiv preprint arXiv:1702.08608.
5. Jain, A., Ong, S. P., Hautier, G., Chen, W., Richards, W. D., Dacek, S., ... & Persson, K. A. (2013). Commentary: The Materials Project: A materials genome approach to accelerating materials innovation. APL Materials, 1(1), 011002.
6. Bergmann, A., & Roldan Cuenya, B. (2019). Operando insights into nanoparticle transformations during catalysis. ACS Catalysis, 9(11), 10020–10043.
7. Veličković, P., Cucurull, G., Casanova, A., Romero, A., Lio, P., & Bengio, Y. (2018). Graph attention networks. International Conference on Learning Representations.
8. Seitz, L. C., Dickens, C. F., Nishio, K., Hikita, Y., Montoya, J., Doyle, A., ... & Jaramillo, T. F. (2016). A highly active and stable IrOx/SrIrO3 catalyst for the oxygen evolution reaction. Science, 353(6303), 1011–1014.
9. Nørskov, J. K., Bligaard, T., Rossmeisl, J., & Christensen, C. H. (2009). Towards the computational design of solid catalysts. Nature Chemistry, 1(1), 37–46.
10. Wilkinson, M. D., Dumontier, M., Aalbersberg, I. J., Appleton, G., Axton, M., Baak, A., ... & Mons, B. (2016). The FAIR Guiding Principles for scientific data management and stewardship. Scientific Data, 3(1), 1–9.
11. Kitchin, J. R. (2018). Machine learning in catalysis. Nature Catalysis, 1(4), 230–232.
12. Peng, C. K., Lin, Y. C., Chiang, C. L., Qian, Z., Huang, Y. C., Dong, C. L., ... & Lin, Y. G. (2023). Zhang-Rice singlets state formed by two-step oxidation for triggering water oxidation under operando conditions. Nature Communications, 14(1), 529.
13. Ying, R., Bourgeois, D., You, J., Zitnik, M., & Leskovec, J. (2019). Gnnexplainer: Generating explanations for graph neural networks. Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems, 32.
14. Baylor, D., Breck, E., Cheng, H. T., Fiedel, N., Foo, C. Y., Haque, Z., ... & Page, D. (2017). TFX: A TensorFlow-based production-scale machine learning platform. Proceedings of the 23rd ACM SIGKDD International Conference on Knowledge Discovery and Data Mining, 1387–1395.
15. Mehrabi, N., Morstatter, F., Saxena, N., Lerman, K., & Galstyan, A. (2021). A survey on bias and fairness in machine learning. ACM Computing Surveys, 54(6), 1–35.
16. Strubell, E., Ganesh, A., & McCallum, A. (2019). Energy and policy considerations for deep learning in NLP. arXiv preprint arXiv:1906.02243.
17. Corma, A., & Serna, P. (2010). High-throughput techniques for the discovery of new catalytic materials. Chemical Society Reviews, 39(5), 1541–1556.
18. Tran, K., Neiswanger, W., Yoon, J., Zhang, Q., Xing, E., & Ulissi, Z. W. (2020). Methods for comparing uncertainty quantifications for materials property predictions. Machine Learning: Science and Technology, 1(2), 025006.
19. International Energy Agency. (2017). Digitalization and Energy. IEA Publications.
20. Floridi, L., & Cowls, J. (2019). A unified framework of five principles for AI in society. Harvard Data Science Review, 1(1).
21. Chanussot, L., Das, A., Goyal, S., Lavril, T., Shuaibi, M., Riviere, M., ... & Ulissi, Z. (2021). Open Catalyst 2020 (OC20) dataset and community challenges. ACS Catalysis, 11(10), 6059–6072.
22. Jiménez-Luna, J., Grisoni, F., & Schneider, G. (2020). Drug discovery with explainable artificial intelligence. Nature Machine Intelligence, 2(10), 573–584.
23. Fabbri, E., Habereder, A., Waltar, K., Kötz, R., & Schmidt, T. J. (2014). Developments and perspectives of oxide-based catalysts for the oxygen evolution reaction. Catalysis Science & Technology, 4(11), 3800–3821.
Downloads
Published
Issue
Section
License
Copyright (c) 2026 Journal of Engineering Systems and Digital Innovation

This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.