MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2076476736 · doi:10.1103/physrevb.81.224104

Genetic algorithm based approach to investigate doped metal oxide materials: Application to lanthanide-doped ceria

2010· article· en· W2076476736 on OpenAlexaff
James Hooper, Arif Mawardi Ismail, Javier B. Giorgi, Tom K. Woo

Bibliographic record

VenuePhysical Review B · 2010
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMaterials Science
TopicCatalytic Processes in Materials Science
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Ottawa
Fundersnot available
KeywordsDopantSamariumDopingDensity functional theoryLanthanideMaterials scienceOxideMetalAlgorithmComputer scienceComputational chemistryPhysicsInorganic chemistryOptoelectronicsChemistryIonQuantum mechanics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

A genetic algorithm (GA)-inspired method to effectively map out low-energy configurations of doped metal oxide materials is presented. Specialized mating and mutation operations that do not alter the identity of the parent metal oxide have been incorporated to efficiently sample the metal dopant and oxygen vacancy sites. The search algorithms have been tested on lanthanide-doped ceria $(L=\text{Sm},\text{Gd},\text{Lu})$ with various dopant concentrations. Using both classical and first-principles density-functional-theory (DFT) potentials, we have shown the methodology reproduces the results of recent systematic searches of doped ceria at low concentrations (3.2% ${L}_{2}{\text{O}}_{3}$) and identifies low-energy structures of concentrated samarium-doped ceria (3.8% and 6.6% ${L}_{2}{\text{O}}_{3}$) which relate to the experimental and theoretical findings published thus far. We introduce a tandem classical/DFT GA algorithm in which an inexpensive classical potential is first used to generate a fit gene pool of structures to enhance the overall efficiency of the computationally demanding DFT-based GA search.

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 distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow), Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: Bench or experimental
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.074
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.004

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 head0.018
GPT teacher head0.298
Teacher spread0.280 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

Study designBench or experimental
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

Citations11
Published2010
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuePhysical Review BSame topicCatalytic Processes in Materials ScienceFrench-language works237,207