MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Roadmap on Data-Centric Materials Science

2024· preprint· en· W4392124033 on OpenAlexaff
Matthias Scheffler, Peter Benner, Tristan Bereau, Volker Blüm, Mario Boley, Christian Carbogno, C. Richard A. Catlow, Gerhard Dehm, Sebastian Eibl, Ralph Ernstorfer, Ádám Fekete, Lucas Foppa, Peter Fratzl, Christoph Freysoldt, Baptiste Gault, Luca M. Ghiringhelli, Sajal Kumar Giri, Anton Gladyshev, Pawan Goyal, Jason Hattrick‐Simpers, Lara Kabalan, Petr Karpov, Mohammad S. Khorrami, Christoph T. Koch, Sebastian Kokott, Thomas Kosch, Igor Kowalec, Kurt Kremer, Andreas Leitherer, Yue Li, Christian H. Liebscher, Andrew J. Logsdail, Zhongwei Lu, Phuc Luong, Andreas Marek, F. Merz, Jaber Rezaei Mianroodi, Jörg Neugebauer, Thomas A. R. Purcell, Dierk Raabe, Markus Rampp, Mariana Rossi, Jan M. Rost, Ulf Saalmann, Alaukik Saxena, Luigi Sbailò, Markus Scheidgen, Marcel Schloz, Daniel F. Schmidt, Simon Teshuva, Annette Trunschke, Ye Wei, Gerhard Weikum, R. Patrick Xian, Yiyu Yao, Meng Zhao

Bibliographic record

VenueChemRxiv · 2024
Typepreprint
Languageen
FieldMaterials Science
TopicMachine Learning in Materials Science
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Toronto
Fundersnot available
KeywordsData scienceTransformative learningField (mathematics)Computer scienceBig dataNanotechnologyKey (lock)Engineering ethicsSociologyEngineeringMaterials scienceData mining

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Science is and always has been based on data, but the terms ‘data-centric’ and the ‘4th paradigm’ of materials research indicate a radical change in how information is retrieved, handled and research is performed. It signifies a transformative shift towards managing vast data collections, digital repositories, and innovative data analytics methods. The integration of Artificial Intelligence (AI) and its subset Machine Learning (ML), has become pivotal in addressing all these challenges. This Roadmap on Data-Centric Materials Science explores fundamental concepts and methodologies, illustrating diverse applications in electronic-structure theory, soft matter theory, microstructure research, and experimental techniques like photoemission, atom probe tomography, and electron microscopy. While the roadmap delves into specific areas within the broad interdisciplinary field of materials science, the provided examples elucidate key concepts applicable to a wider range of topics. The discussed instances offer insights into addressing the multifaceted challenges encountered in contemporary materials research.

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)0.007
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow), Scholarly communication, Open science, Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesOpen science, Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)
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 score0.021
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0070.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0020.000
Open science0.0080.018
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0050.015

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 head0.041
GPT teacher head0.327
Teacher spread0.286 · 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; both teacher heads agree on what is shown here.

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

Citations1
Published2024
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueChemRxivSame topicMachine Learning in Materials ScienceFrench-language works237,207