Stochastic Multiscale Modeling of Electrical Conductivity of Carbon Nanotube Polymer Nanocomposites: An Interpretable Machine Learning Approach
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This study introduces an interpretable machine learning (ML) framework for efficiently predicting the electrical conductivity of carbon nanotube (CNT)/polymer nanocomposites. A stochastic multiscale numerical model based on representative volume element (RVE) is employed to generate a representative dataset. This dataset is used to train three ML models, including random forest, XGBoost, and artificial neural networks (ANN). The dataset includes six input features: CNT length, aspect ratio, intrinsic CNT conductivity, number of CNT conduction channels, energy barrier height, and volume fraction, with the electrical conductivity of the nanocomposites as the output feature. The findings highlight the exceptional accuracy of the ANN model in predicting electrical conductivity at significantly lower computational costs. Furthermore, the use of Shapley additive explanations (SHAP) enhances the interpretability of these ML models, identifying the volume fraction, energy barrier height, and intrinsic CNT conductivity as the most influential factors affecting conductivity. This approach sets the stage for rapid and efficient modeling of CNT/polymer nanocomposites facilitating the design of materials with tailored electrical properties for diverse applications.
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 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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".