RMSE and mean absolute error (MAE) values for each method compared to the DFT reference computed paths. It is interesting to note that the Winey et al. potential[@Winey2009AAluminum], which does exceptionally well in predicting many FCC properties (see Table S3 of the SI), struggles to accurately predict the Bain and GSFE slip paths. Errors in modeling the BCC and FCC energy barriers can have severe consequences in MD simulations. We will show an example in Sec. \[results:meltcurve\], where the Mendelev et al. potential[@Mendelev2008AnalysisCu] predicts transformation from FCC at BCC at just [${20}\,\mathrm{GPa}$]{}, whereas the physically correct pressure should be hundreds of GPa.

Predicting radial distribution functions
----------------------------------------

![image](images/liq_rdf-rho.pdf){width="\linewidth"}

To validate our ANI-Al model in the liquid phase, we carry out MD simulations to measure radial distribution functions (RDF), densities at various temperatures, and a partial solid/liquid phase diagram. Figure \[fig:rdfdensity\]a compares simulated RDFs with experimental measurements [@Mauro2011HighAl] at 1123K, 1183K, and 1273K. Independent simulations were performed in the isobaric-isothermal (NPT) ensemble to determine equilibrium densities of liquid Al at the relevant (P,T) conditions. The starting configurations for Radial Distribution Function (RDF) calculations were created using these densities and was equilibrated for 50 ps in the NVT ensemble using the Nosé-Hoover-style 