Machine learning the quantum-chemical properties of metal–organic frameworks for accelerated materials discovery
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Metal–organic frameworks (MOFs) are a widely investigated class of crystalline solids with tunable structures that make it possible to impart specific chemical functionality tailored for a given application. However, the enormous number of possible MOFs that can be synthesized makes it difficult to determine which materials would be the most promising candidates, especially for applications governed by electronic structure properties that are often computationally demanding to simulate and time-consuming to probe experimentally. Here, we have developed the first publicly available quantum-chemical database for MOFs (the “QMOF database”), which consists of properties derived from density functional theory (DFT) for over 14,000 experimentally synthesized MOFs. Throughout this study, we demonstrate how this new database can be used to identify MOFs with targeted electronic structure properties. As a proof-of-concept, we use the QMOF database to evaluate the performance of several machine learning models for the prediction of DFT-computed band gaps and find that crystal graph convolutional neural networks are capable of achieving superior predictive performance, making it possible to circumvent computationally expensive quantum-chemical calculations. We also show how unsupervised learning methods can aid the discovery of otherwise subtle structure–property relationships using the computational findings in this work. We conclude by highlighting several MOFs with low band gaps, a challenging task given the electronically insulating nature of most MOF structures. The data and predictive models generated in this work, as well as the database of MOF structures, should be highly useful to other researchers interested in the predictive design and discovery of MOFs for the many applications dictated by quantum-chemical phenomena.
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 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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".