A deep generative modeling architecture for designing lattice-constrained perovskite materials
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
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.
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.002 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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 it