Genetic algorithm based approach to investigate doped metal oxide materials: Application to lanthanide-doped ceria
Bibliographic record
Abstract
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 machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".