MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2057648175 · doi:10.1103/physreve.84.046704

Kinetic activation-relaxation technique

2011· article· en· W2057648175 on OpenAlexaff
Laurent Karim Béland, P.E. Brommer, Fedwa El‐Mellouhi, Jean-François Joly, Normand Mousseau

Bibliographic record

VenuePhysical Review E · 2011
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicSilicon and Solar Cell Technologies
Canadian institutionsUniversité de MontréalRegroupement Québécois sur les Matériaux de Pointe
Fundersnot available
KeywordsKinetic Monte CarloKinetic energyRelaxation (psychology)Lattice (music)Amorphous solidSiliconStatistical physicsMaterials scienceAnnihilationAmorphous siliconMonte Carlo methodCrystalline siliconPhysicsCrystallographyChemistryMathematicsClassical mechanicsQuantum mechanics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

We present a detailed description of the kinetic activation-relaxation technique (k-ART), an off-lattice, self-learning kinetic Monte Carlo (KMC) algorithm with on-the-fly event search. Combining a topological classification for local environments and event generation with ART nouveau, an efficient unbiased sampling method for finding transition states, k-ART can be applied to complex materials with atoms in off-lattice positions or with elastic deformations that cannot be handled with standard KMC approaches. In addition to presenting the various elements of the algorithm, we demonstrate the general character of k-ART by applying the algorithm to three challenging systems: self-defect annihilation in c-Si (crystalline silicon), self-interstitial diffusion in Fe, and structural relaxation in a-Si (amorphous silicon).

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.010
Threshold uncertainty score0.035

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0020.001
Research integrity0.0010.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0100.003

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.031
GPT teacher head0.261
Teacher spread0.230 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designSimulation or modeling
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations162
Published2011
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuePhysical Review ESame topicSilicon and Solar Cell TechnologiesFrench-language works237,207