MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W2971545066 · doi:10.48550/arxiv.1909.03549

Prediction of optical spectra of coarse-grained polymers as a sequence generation problem: the Recurrent Neural Networks solution

2019· preprint· en· W2971545066 on OpenAlexaff
Lena Simine, Thomas C. Allen, Peter J. Rossky

Bibliographic record

VenuearXiv (Cornell University) · 2019
Typepreprint
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicOrganic Electronics and Photovoltaics
Canadian institutionsMcGill University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsComputer scienceRepresentation (politics)Spectral lineArtificial neural networkSpectroscopyDeep learningSequence (biology)Recurrent neural networkSimilarity (geometry)Artificial intelligenceAlgorithmChemistryPhysicsQuantum mechanics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Coarse-grained simulations of conjugated polymers have become a popular way of investigating the device physics of organic photovoltaics. While UV-Vis spectroscopy remains one of key experimental methods for the interrogation of these devices, a rigorous bridge between coarse-grained simulations and spectroscopy has never been established. Here we address this challenge by developing a method that predicts spectra of conjugated polymers directly from coarse-grained representations while avoiding ad-hoc procedures such as back-mapping from coarse-grained to atomistic representations followed by computing the spectra using standard quantum chemistry methods. Our approach is based on a generative deep learning model: the long-short-term memory recurrent neural network (LSTM-RNN) and it is suggested by the apparent similarity between natural languages and the mathematical structure of the perturbative expansions of the excited state energies due to small fluctuations of the polymer conformation. We use this model to demonstrate a dangerous discrepancy between the spectra obtained in the coarse-grained representation and after the back-mapping. This indicates that standard protocols may require additional fine-tuning in order to become reliable and that our model presents a novel tool uniquely suited for improving the back-mapping protocols and for including spectral data in the development of coarse-grained potentials.

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)0.004
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: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.004
Threshold uncertainty score0.009

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.004
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.002
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0020.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.053
GPT teacher head0.177
Teacher spread0.124 · 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

Citations0
Published2019
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuearXiv (Cornell University)→Same topicOrganic Electronics and Photovoltaics→French-language works237,207→