MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3023220159 · doi:10.2172/1616513

Basic Research Needs Workshop on Synthesis Science for Energy Relevant Technology

2016· report· en· W3023220159 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

fundA Canadian funder is recorded on the work.
no affNo Canadian affiliation: this work is invisible to an affiliation-only frame.
No Canadian affiliation. An affiliation-only frame, the usual design, would never have seen this work. It is one of the works that make the case for inverting the frame.

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typereport
Languageen
FieldMaterials Science
TopicMachine Learning in Materials Science
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersSandia National LaboratoriesBrookhaven National LaboratoryArgonne National LaboratoryUniversity of DaytonUniversity of Illinois at Urbana-ChampaignPacific Northwest National LaboratoryBasic Energy SciencesAdvanced Research Projects Agency - EnergyNorthwestern UniversityYork UniversityIowa State UniversityDrexel UniversityWashington State UniversityUniversity of California, Los AngelesState University of New YorkAdvanced Research Projects AgencySLAC National Accelerator LaboratoryHarvard UniversityUniversity of LimerickU.S. Department of EnergyBrown UniversityOffice of SciencePrinceton UniversityJohns Hopkins UniversityFlorida State UniversityNational Science FoundationYale UniversityMassachusetts Institute of Technology
KeywordsSAFERComputer scienceNanotechnologyComputer security

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The technology that lies at our fingertips becomes more powerful each day. Smartphones connect us instantly to family, friends, and co-workers around the globe; give us access to a limitless stream of information; control the heating in our homes; and serve as our cameras, calculators, flashlights, music players, boarding passes and, on occasion, our phones. Cars are ever more fuel-efficient, safer, semi-autonomous, and have more computing power than the systems that guided humankind to the moon. LED lighting and solar panels are becoming commonplace, replacing less efficient technologies and expanding the energy options available worldwide. Novel polymers and nanoparticles are playing a crucial role in enhanced oil recovery. None of these advances would have been possible without the discovery and development of, and ability to create, new materials and chemical processes. Now imagine what our world would be like if we could accelerate those discoveries a thousandfold. What if the only limit to synthesizing new forms of matter were the imagination? We could build complex assemblies of atoms and molecules with architectures and capabilities far exceeding those of materials found in nature—for example, develop catalysts that turn garbage into fuels, design solar cells to power our homes directly from sunlight, make batteries with the energy density of gasoline, and create one- and two-dimensional solids that transport charge hundreds of times faster than silicon or allow us to build quantum bits based on the spins of electrons or photons to realize the promise of “beyond Moore’s law” computing. Advances in synthesis science are required to bring about this future—we not only must know how to design new molecules and materials with desired functions and properties through theory and computational techniques; we also must be able to make the materials we envision. New approaches to discovering as yet unimagined matter require a sea change in the way we think about the science of synthesis. Chemical and materials sciences have traditionally focused on understanding structure–function relationships with the goal of predicting where the atoms should be placed to achieve a targeted property or process. Much less effort has been directed toward a predictive science of synthesis—understanding how to get the atoms where they need to go to achieve the desired structure. This report, which is the result of the Basic Energy Sciences Workshop on Basic Research Needs for Synthesis Science for Energy Technologies, lays out the scientific challenges and opportunities in synthesis science. The workshop was attended by more than 100 leading national and international scientific experts. Its five topical and two crosscutting panels identified four priority research directions (PRDs) for realizing the vision of predictive, science-directed synthesis.

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.

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)0.027
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.043
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMetaresearch, Meta-epidemiology (narrow), Science and technology studies, Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesScience and technology studies, Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Other · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.503
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0270.043
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0050.003
Science and technology studies0.0020.005
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0050.002
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0040.001

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.

Opus teacher head0.086
GPT teacher head0.398
Teacher spread0.312 · 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

Quick stats

Citations20
Published2016
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicMachine Learning in Materials ScienceFrench-language works237,207