MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4393064730 · doi:10.1139/cjc-2023-0232

The success of computational material design for sustainable energy catalysis

2024· article· en· W4393064730 on OpenAlexafffundvenue
Samira Siahrostami, Nicholas Murray

Bibliographic record

VenueCanadian Journal of Chemistry · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMaterials Science
TopicMachine Learning in Materials Science
Canadian institutionsSimon Fraser University
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada
KeywordsCatalysisContext (archaeology)ChemistryChemical spaceBiochemical engineeringNanotechnologyVariety (cybernetics)Density functional theoryChemical reaction engineeringProcess engineeringComputer scienceComputational chemistryOrganic chemistryMaterials scienceArtificial intelligenceEngineeringDrug discovery

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Computational material design (CMD) employs quantum mechanical simulations, density functional theory, and machine learning techniques to correlate electronic structural attributes with physical and chemical properties of materials. Over the last decade, CMD has proven to be critical to the advancement of materials science and a variety of engineering fields. This contribution provides an overview of CMD’s success in driving materials discovery for catalysis in the context of sustainable energy applications. Specifically, we discuss how CMD has enabled the development of catalysts for three electrochemical processes that are critical to sustainable energy applications, oxygen reduction reactions, water oxidation reactions, and CO2 reduction reactions. We illustrate how CMD provides a powerful and efficient method for understanding underlying reaction mechanisms as well as predicting and optimizing catalyst properties. Furthermore, we demonstrate how this strategic approach has enabled researchers to effectively navigate the vast chemical space of potential catalysts and rapidly identify novel materials possessing desirable electronic structures and catalytic activity.

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)0.002
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: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.997
Threshold uncertainty score0.009

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.005
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0020.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.001

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 head0.007
GPT teacher head0.234
Teacher spread0.227 · 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 designSimulation or modeling
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 routes3
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCanadian Journal of ChemistrySame topicMachine Learning in Materials ScienceFrench-language works237,207