Ph3pyWF: An automated workflow software package for ceramic lattice thermal conductivity calculation
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This paper introduces Ph3pyWF, a Python software package we designed to facilitate high-throughput analysis of lattice thermal conductivity in ceramic materials. The user interface caters to individuals with varying expertise, accommodating both novices and experts in the field. For beginners, only the initial structure file is required as input, as the software automatically populates other necessary parameters. Advanced users can customize numerous procedure parameters to suit their specific research needs. At its core, Ph3pyWF aims to establish an efficient data exchange and task management system. This paper elucidates the design details of the software package and presents several examples of its application to oxide ceramics , showcasing its general applicability and practicality in the analysis of lattice thermal conductivity . Program Summary Program title: Ph3pyWF CPC Library link to program files: https://doi.org/10.17632/487gf74mgh.1 Developer's repository link: https://github.com/MatFrontier/ph3pywf Licensing provisions: MIT Programming language: Python 3 External routines/libraries: Phonopy, Phono3py, Atomate, FireWorks, pymatgen Nature of problem: The calculation of lattice thermal conductivity using the first-principles method necessitates a multitude of interdependent subprocesses . Manually executing and managing such a collection of subprocesses proves to be inefficient and prone to errors. Solution method: Employing scientific workflow framework to automate the lattice thermal conductivity calculation process. Providing a near-turnkey solution with simpler management interface to users.
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 | 0.003 | 0.006 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.004 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.004 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.048 | 0.023 |
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".