Reinforcement learning for in silico determination of adsorbate—substrate structures
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Reinforcement learning (RL) methods have helped to define the state of the art in the field of modern artificial intelligence, mostly after the breakthrough involving AlphaGo and the discovery of novel algorithms. In this work, we present a RL method, based on Q-learning, for the structural determination of adsorbate@substrate models in silico, where the minimization of the energy landscape resulting from adsorbate interactions with a substrate is made by actions on states (translations and rotations) chosen from an agent's policy. The proposed RL method is implemented in an early version of the reinforcement learning software for materials design and discovery (RLMaterial), developed in Python3.x. RLMaterial interfaces with deMon2k, DFTB+, ORCA, and Quantum Espresso codes to compute the adsorbate@substrate energies. The RL method was applied for the structural determination of (i) the amino acid glycine and (ii) 2-amino-acetaldehyde, both interacting with a boron nitride (BN) monolayer, (iii) host-guest interactions between phenylboronic acid and β-cyclodextrin and (iv) ammonia on naphthalene. Density functional tight binding calculations were used to build the complex search surfaces with a reasonably low computational cost for systems (i)-(iii) and DFT for system (iv). Artificial neural network and gradient boosting regression techniques were employed to approximate the Q-matrix or Q-table for better decision making (policy) on next actions. Finally, we have developed a transfer-learning protocol within the RL framework that allows learning from one chemical system and transferring the experience to another, as well as from different DFT or DFTB levels.
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 | 0.005 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 0.000 |
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.
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".