MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4408361374 · doi:10.1021/acs.chemmater.5c00022

Driving Thermoelectric Optimization in AgSbTe<sub>2</sub> via Design of Experiments and Machine Learning

2025· article· en· W4408361374 on OpenAlexafffund
Jan‐Hendrik Pöhls, Chun-Wan Timothy Lo, Marissa MacIver, Yu‐Chih Tseng, Yurij Mozharivskyj

Bibliographic record

VenueChemistry of Materials · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMaterials Science
TopicAdvanced Thermoelectric Materials and Devices
Canadian institutionsNatural Resources CanadaMcMaster UniversityUniversity of New Brunswick
FundersNational Science Foundation Graduate Research Fellowship ProgramNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of CanadaNew Brunswick Innovation Foundation
KeywordsThermoelectric effectComputer scienceMachine designMaterials scienceNanotechnologyArtificial intelligenceEngineeringMechanical engineeringPhysics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Systemic optimization of thermoelectric materials is arduous due to their conflicting electrical and thermal properties. A strategy based on Design of Experiments and machine learning is developed to optimize the thermoelectric efficiency of AgSb 1+ x Te 2+ y, an established thermoelectric. From eight experiments, high thermoelectric performance in AgSb 1.021 Te 2.04 is revealed with a peak and average thermoelectric figure of merit of 1.61 ± 0.24 at 600 K and 1.18 ± 0.18 (300–623 K), respectively, which is >30% higher than the best literature values for AgSb 1+ x Te 2+ y . Ag deficiency and suppression of secondary phases in AgSb 1.021 Te 2.04 improve the electrical properties and reduce the thermal conductivity (∼0.4 W m –1 K –1 ). Our strategy is implemented into an open-source graphical user interface, and it can be used to optimize the methodologies, properties, and processes across different scientific fields.

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)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: Bench or experimental
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.025
Threshold uncertainty score0.682

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

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

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 head0.010
GPT teacher head0.235
Teacher spread0.225 · 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.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designBench or experimental
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

Citations6
Published2025
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueChemistry of MaterialsSame topicAdvanced Thermoelectric Materials and DevicesFrench-language works237,207