Learning to grow: Control of material self-assembly using evolutionary reinforcement learning
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.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
We show that neural networks trained by evolutionary reinforcement learning can enact efficient molecular self-assembly protocols. Presented with molecular simulation trajectories, networks learn to change temperature and chemical potential in order to promote the assembly of desired structures or choose between competing polymorphs. In the first case, networks reproduce in a qualitative sense the results of previously known protocols, but faster and with higher fidelity; in the second case they identify strategies previously unknown, from which we can extract physical insight. Networks that take as input the elapsed time of the simulation or microscopic information from the system are both effective, the latter more so. The evolutionary scheme we have used is simple to implement and can be applied to a broad range of examples of experimental self-assembly, whether or not one can monitor the experiment as it proceeds. Our results have been achieved with no human input beyond the specification of which order parameter to promote, pointing the way to the design of synthesis protocols by artificial intelligence.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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 it