Algorithmic developments of the kinetic activation-relaxation technique: Accessing long-time kinetics of larger and more complex systems
Bibliographic record
Abstract
In spite of the considerable computer speed increase of the last decades, long-time atomic simulations remain a challenge and most molecular dynamical simulations are limited to 1 μs at the very best in condensed matter and materials science. There is a need, therefore, for accelerated methods that can bridge the gap between the full dynamical description of molecular dynamics and experimentally relevant time scales. This is the goal of the kinetic Activation-Relaxation Technique (k-ART), an off-lattice kinetic Monte-Carlo method with on-the-fly catalog building capabilities based on the topological tool NAUTY and the open-ended search method Activation-Relaxation Technique (ART nouveau) that has been applied with success to the study of long-time kinetics of complex materials, including grain boundaries, alloys, and amorphous materials. We present a number of recent algorithmic additions, including the use of local force calculation, two-level parallelization, improved topological description, and biased sampling and show how they perform on two applications linked to defect diffusion and relaxation after ion bombardement in Si.
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 | 0.001 | 0.006 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.003 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
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".