A deep generative modeling architecture for designing lattice-constrained perovskite materials
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract In modern materials discovery, materials are now efficiently screened using machine learning (ML) techniques with target-specific properties for meeting various engineering applications. However, a major challenge that persists with deep generative ML approach is the issue related to lattice reconstruction at the decoding phase, leading to the generation of materials with low symmetry, unfeasible atomic coordination, and triclinic behavioral properties in the crystal lattice. To address this concern, the present research makes a contribution by proposing a Lattice-Constrained Materials Generative Model (LCMGM) for designing new and polymorphic perovskite materials with crystal conformities that are consistent with predefined geometrical and thermodynamic stability constraints at the encoding phase. A comparison with baseline models such as Physics Guided Crystal Generative Model (PGCGM) and Fourier-Transformed Crystal Property (FTCP), confirms the potential of the LCMGM for improved training stability, better chemical learning effect and higher geometrical conformity. The new materials emerging from this research are Density Functional Theory (DFT) validated and openly made available in the Mendeley data repository: https://doi.org/10.17632/m262xxpgn2.1 .
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 | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 0.001 |
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.
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".