MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4252056807 · doi:10.26434/chemrxiv.13551629.v2

Modeling LiF and FLiBe Molten Salts with Robust Neural Network Interatomic Potentials

2021· preprint· en· W4252056807 on OpenAlexfundno aff
Stephen Lam, Qing‐Jie Li, R. G. Ballinger, Charles Forsberg, Ju Li

Bibliographic record

VenueChemRxiv · 2021
Typepreprint
Languageen
FieldMaterials Science
TopicMachine Learning in Materials Science
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of CanadaOffice of Nuclear EnergyNuclear Energy University ProgramU.S. Department of Energy
KeywordsMolecular dynamicsMelting pointMaterials scienceLithium (medication)Chemical physicsInteratomic potentialAtom (system on chip)Work (physics)Absorption (acoustics)Molten saltThermodynamicsChemistryComputational chemistry

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Lithium-based molten salts have attracted significant attention due to their applications in energy storage, advanced fission reactors and fusion devices. Lithium fluorides and particularly 66.6%LiF-33.3¾F 2 (Flibe) are of considerable interest in nuclear systems, as they show an excellent combination of desirable heat-transfer and neutron-absorption characteristics. For nuclear salts, the range of possible local structures, compositions, and thermodynamic conditions presents significant challenges in atomistic modeling. In this work, we demonstrate that atom-centered neural network interatomic potentials (NNIP) provide a fast and accurate method for performing molecular dynamics of molten salts. For LiF, these potentials are able to accurately model dimer interactions, crystalline solids under deformation, semi-crystalline LiF near the melting point and liquid LiF at high temperatures. For Flibe, NNIPs accurately predicts the structures and dynamics at normal operating conditions, high temperature-pressure conditions, and in the crystalline solid phase. Furthermore, we show that NNIP-based molecular dynamics of molten salts are scalable to reach long timescales (e.g., nanosecond) and large system sizes (e.g., 10 5 atoms), while maintaining ab initio accuracy and providing more than three orders of magnitude of computational speedup for calculating structure and transport properties.

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 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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow), Scholarly communication
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.109
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0020.000
Open science0.0010.002
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.020
GPT teacher head0.243
Teacher spread0.224 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

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
Published2021
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueChemRxivSame topicMachine Learning in Materials ScienceFrench-language works237,207