<i>WhereWulff</i>: A Semiautonomous Workflow for Systematic Catalyst Surface Reactivity under Reaction Conditions
Bibliographic record
Abstract
High Resolution Image Download MS PowerPoint Slide This paper introduces WhereWulff, a semiautonomous workflow for modeling the reactivity of catalyst surfaces. The workflow begins with a bulk optimization task that takes an initial bulk structure and returns the optimized bulk geometry and magnetic state, including stability under reaction conditions. The stable bulk structure is the input to a surface chemistry task that enumerates surfaces up to a user-specified maximum Miller index, computes relaxed surface energies for those surfaces, and then prioritizes those for subsequent adsorption energy calculations based on their contribution to the Wulff construction shape. The workflow handles computational resource constraints such as limited wall-time as well as automated job submission and analysis. We illustrate the workflow for oxygen evolution reaction (OER) intermediates on two double perovskites. WhereWulff nearly halved the number of Density Functional Theory (DFT) calculations from ∼240 to ∼132 by prioritizing terminations, up to a maximum Miller index of 1, based on surface stability. Additionally, it automatically handled the 180 additional resubmission jobs required to successfully converge 120+ atoms systems under a 48-h wall-time cluster constraint. There are four main use cases that we envision for WhereWulff: (1) as a first-principles source of truth to validate and update a closed-loop self-sustaining materials discovery pipeline, (2) as a data generation tool, (3) as an educational tool, allowing users (e.g., experimentalists) unfamiliar with OER modeling to probe materials they might be interested in before doing further in-domain analyses, (4) and finally, as a starting point for users to extend with reactions other than the OER, as part of a collaborative software community.
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 | 0.002 | 0.004 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.003 | 0.003 |
| Open science | 0.004 | 0.003 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.107 | 0.060 |
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".