MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4404623935 · doi:10.1557/s43578-024-01480-9

Structure–property predictions in metallic glasses: Insights from data-driven atomistic simulations

2024· article· en· W4404623935 on OpenAlexaff
Gokul Raman Arumugam Kumar, Kanika Arora, Manish Aggarwal, S. Swayamjyoti, Param Punj Singh, Κ. K. Sahu, Raghavan Ranganathan

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of materials research/Pratt's guide to venture capital sources · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicMetallic Glasses and Amorphous Alloys
Canadian institutionsMcGill University
FundersIndian Space Research Organisation
KeywordsAmorphous metalMaterials scienceRelaxation (psychology)StiffnessProperty (philosophy)Glass transitionViscoelasticityWork (physics)Shear (geology)NanotechnologyChemical physicsStatistical physicsThermodynamicsPolymerComposite materialPhysicsAlloy

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract The field of metallic glasses has been an active area of research owing to the complex structure–property correlations and intricacies surrounding glass formation and relaxation. This review provides a thorough examination of significant works that elucidate the structure–property correlations of metallic glasses, derived from detailed atomistic simulations coupled with data-driven approaches. The review starts with the theoretical and fundamental framework for understanding important properties of metallic glasses such as transition temperatures, relaxation phenomena, the potential energy landscape, structural features such as soft spots and shear transformation zones, atomic stiffness and structural correlations. The need to understand these concepts for leveraging metallic glasses for a wide range of applications such as performance under tensile loading, viscoelastic properties, relaxation behavior and shock loading is also elucidated. Finally, the use of machine learning algorithms in predicting the properties of metallic glasses along with their applications, limitations and scope for future work is presented. Graphical abstract

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 distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.829
Threshold uncertainty score0.999

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.040
GPT teacher head0.319
Teacher spread0.279 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

Study designNot applicable
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

Citations10
Published2024
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of materials research/Pratt's guide to venture capital sourcesSame topicMetallic Glasses and Amorphous AlloysFrench-language works237,207