MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4381806304 · doi:10.1063/5.0143211

Evaluating approaches for on-the-fly machine learning interatomic potentials for activated mechanisms sampling with the activation-relaxation technique nouveau

2023· article· en· W4381806304 on OpenAlexafffund
Eugène Sanscartier, Félix Saint-Denis, Karl-Étienne Bolduc, Normand Mousseau

Bibliographic record

VenueThe Journal of Chemical Physics · 2023
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMaterials Science
TopicMachine Learning in Materials Science
Canadian institutionsUniversité de MontréalRegroupement Québécois sur les Matériaux de Pointe
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of CanadaInstitut de Valorisation des DonnéesCompute Canada
KeywordsRelaxation (psychology)Computer scienceRange (aeronautics)On the flyWork (physics)SiliconTensor (intrinsic definition)Statistical physicsArtificial intelligenceMaterials sciencePhysicsNanotechnologyMachine learningNeuroscienceMathematicsThermodynamics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In the last few years, much effort has gone into developing general machine-learning potentials capable of describing interactions for a wide range of structures and phases. Yet, as attention turns to more complex materials, including alloys and disordered and heterogeneous systems, the challenge of providing reliable descriptions for all possible environments becomes ever more costly. In this work, we evaluate the benefits of using specific vs general potentials for the study of activated mechanisms in solid-state materials. More specifically, we test three machine-learning fitting approaches using the moment-tensor potential to reproduce a reference potential when exploring the energy landscape around a vacancy in Stillinger-Weber silicon crystal and silicon-germanium zincblende structures using the activation-relaxation technique nouveau (ARTn). We find that a targeted on-the-fly approach specific to and integrated into ARTn generates the highest precision on the energetics and geometry of activated barriers while remaining cost-effective. This approach expands the types of problems that can be addressed with high-accuracy ML potential.

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)0.005
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: Bench or experimental
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.384
Threshold uncertainty score0.441

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0050.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.088
GPT teacher head0.329
Teacher spread0.241 · 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.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designBench or experimental
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
Published2023
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueThe Journal of Chemical PhysicsSame topicMachine Learning in Materials ScienceFrench-language works237,207