the melt temperature at atmospheric pressure.[]{data-label="fig:melt_curve"}](images/melt_curve_melt_point.pdf){width="\linewidth"}

Figure \[fig:melt\_curve\] shows the liquid-solid coexistence line in the pressure-temperature plane. At each pressure, we calculated the coexistence temperature by performing simulations with an explicit solid-liquid interface [@Morris1994MeltingPhases; @Morris2002TheSimulations; @Espinosa2013OnModel]. The details of these simulations are provided in Section 1.4.1 of the supplemental information. We studied FCC-liquid coexistence at pressures up to about [${100}\,\mathrm{GPa}$]{} to match the range of experimental data [@Hanstrom2000HighAluminium]. The ANI-Al simulations are compared with prior DFT calculations [@Sjostrom2016MultiphaseTheory] and a classical MD potential. For the latter, we used the Mendelev et al. potential [@Mendelev2008AnalysisCu], which was explicitly parameterized to model the melting point of aluminum, $T_\textrm{melt} \approx {{933}\,\mathrm{K}}$ at atmospheric pressure. At this pressure, both Mendelev and ANI-Al potentials predict an FCC melting point of about [${925}\,\mathrm{K}$]{}, in good agreement with experiment. The ANI-Al model accurately predicts the melt curve up to [${50}\,\mathrm{GPa}$]{} and [${3000}\,\mathrm{K}$]{}, where it begins to underestimate the melting temperature. Figure S2 of the SI shows the distribution of pressures in the active learning training dataset. The Mendelev model begins to underestimate the melting temperature at around [${5}\,\mathrm{GPa}$]{}. Surprisingly, at pressures above about [${20}\,\mathrm{GPa}$]{}, the Mendelev simulations are unstable to nucleation into the BCC crystal. According to 