MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4385671288 · doi:10.1039/d3dd00113j

14 examples of how LLMs can transform materials science and chemistry: a reflection on a large language model hackathon

2023· article· en· W4385671288 on OpenAlexaff
Kevin Maik Jablonka, Qianxiang Ai, Alexander Al‐Feghali, Shruti Badhwar, Joshua D. Bocarsly, Andres M Bran, Stefan Bringuier, L. Catherine Brinson, Kamal Choudhary, Defne Çırcı, Sam Cox, Wibe A. de Jong, Matthew L. Evans, Nicolas Gastellu, Jérôme Genzling, M.V. Gil, Ankur K. Gupta, Zhi Hong, Alishba Imran, Sabine Kruschwitz, Anne Labarre, Jakub Lála, Tao Liu, Steven Ma, Sauradeep Majumdar, G. Merz, Nicolas Moitessier, Elias Moubarak, Beatriz Mouriño, Brenden G. Pelkie, Michael Pieler, Mayk Caldas Ramos, Bojana Ranković, Samuel G. Rodriques, Jacob N. Sanders, Philippe Schwaller, Marcus Schwarting, Jiale Shi, Berend Smit, Ben E. Smith, Joren Van Herck, Christoph Völker, Logan Ward, Sean Warren, Benjamin Weiser, Sylvester Zhang, Xiaoqi Zhang, Ghezal Ahmad Zia, Aristana Scourtas, K. J. Schmidt, Ian Foster, Andrew Dickson White, Ben Blaiszik

Bibliographic record

VenueDigital Discovery · 2023
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicBiomedical and Engineering Education
Canadian institutionsMcGill University
FundersNCCR CatalysisCenter for Hierarchical Materials DesignFédération Wallonie-BruxellesHigh Energy PhysicsFrancis Crick InstituteNational Institute of General Medical SciencesGrantham Foundation for the Protection of the EnvironmentEngineering and Physical Sciences Research CouncilConsejo Superior de Investigaciones CientíficasNational Center for Advancing Translational SciencesMedical Research CouncilNational Institute of Standards and TechnologyOffice of ScienceH2020 Marie Skłodowska-Curie ActionsSchweizerischer Nationalfonds zur Förderung der Wissenschaftlichen ForschungAgencia Estatal de InvestigaciónCancer Research UKWellcome TrustU.S. Department of EnergyEuropean CommissionEsperantic Studies FoundationHorizon 2020 Framework ProgrammeNational Science FoundationNational Institutes of HealthU.S. Department of Commerce
KeywordsReflection (computer programming)Computer scienceChemistryNanotechnologyMaterials scienceProgramming language

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

We report the findings of a hackathon focused on exploring the diverse applications of large language models in molecular and materials science.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.011
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.029
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMetaresearch
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Qualitative · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Commentary · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.989
Threshold uncertainty score0.060

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0110.029
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.002
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0050.025
Scholarly communication0.0090.024
Open science0.0020.009
Research integrity0.0050.012
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0150.003

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 head0.013
GPT teacher head0.229
Teacher spread0.216 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

Study designQualitative
DomainMethods
GenreCommentary

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

Citations202
Published2023
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueDigital DiscoverySame topicBiomedical and Engineering EducationFrench-language works237,207