MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4387866108 · doi:10.1063/5.0158783

ACEpotentials.jl: A Julia implementation of the atomic cluster expansion

2023· article· en· W4387866108 on OpenAlexafffund
William C. Witt, Cas van der Oord, Elena Gelžinytė, Teemu Järvinen, Andres Ross, James P. Darby, Cheuk Hin Ho, William J. Baldwin, Matthias Sachs, James R. Kermode, Noam Bernstein, Gábor Cśanyi, Christoph Ortner

Bibliographic record

VenueThe Journal of Chemical Physics · 2023
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMaterials Science
TopicMachine Learning in Materials Science
Canadian institutionsUniversity of British Columbia
FundersAir Force Research LaboratoryOffice of Naval ResearchU.S. Naval Research LaboratoryScience and Technology Facilities CouncilDell EMCEuropean CommissionNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of CanadaUniversity of WarwickMaterials and Manufacturing DirectorateEngineering and Physical Sciences Research CouncilLeverhulme Trust
KeywordsInterpretabilityRobustness (evolution)Computer scienceWorkflowTranslation (biology)SoftwarePermutation (music)SimplicityGravitational singularityQuantumAlgorithmTheoretical computer scienceComputational scienceStatistical physicsArtificial intelligencePhysicsQuantum mechanicsProgramming languageDatabaseChemistry

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

We introduce ACEpotentials.jl, a Julia-language software package that constructs interatomic potentials from quantum mechanical reference data using the Atomic Cluster Expansion [R. Drautz, Phys. Rev. B 99, 014104 (2019)]. As the latter provides a complete description of atomic environments, including invariance to overall translation and rotation as well as permutation of like atoms, the resulting potentials are systematically improvable and data efficient. Furthermore, the descriptor's expressiveness enables use of a linear model, facilitating rapid evaluation and straightforward application of Bayesian techniques for active learning. We summarize the capabilities of ACEpotentials.jl and demonstrate its strengths (simplicity, interpretability, robustness, performance) on a selection of prototypical atomistic modelling workflows.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.005
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: Not applicable
GenreCandidate signal: Software · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.048
Threshold uncertainty score0.162

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.005
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.002
Bibliometrics0.0010.002
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0020.002
Open science0.0060.003
Research integrity0.0010.003
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0480.018

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 head0.298
Teacher spread0.285 · 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.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreSoftware

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

Citations40
Published2023
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

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