MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4411022830 · doi:10.1016/j.eng.2025.03.036

Progress of Machine Learning in Molecular Crystal Design and Crystallization Development

2025· article· en· W4411022830 on OpenAlexaff
Shengzhe Jia, Yiming Ma, Yuechao Cao, Zhenguo Gao, Sohrab Rohani, Junbo Gong, Jingkang Wang

Bibliographic record

VenueEngineering · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMaterials Science
TopicMachine Learning in Materials Science
Canadian institutionsWestern University
FundersChina Scholarship CouncilKey Technology Research and Development Program of ShandongNational Natural Science Foundation of ChinaInnovative Research Group Project of the National Natural Science Foundation of China
KeywordsCrystallizationDevelopment (topology)Crystal (programming language)Materials scienceComputer scienceNanotechnologyEngineeringChemical engineeringMathematicsProgramming language

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Machine learning (ML) can optimize the research paradigm and shorten the time from discovery to application of novel functional materials, pharmaceuticals, and fine chemicals. Besides supporting material and drug design, ML is a potentially valuable tool for predictive modeling and process optimization. Herein, we first review the recent progress in data-driven ML for molecular crystal design, including property and structure predictions. ML can accelerate the development of the solvates, co-crystals, and colloidal nanocrystals, and improve the efficiency of crystal design. Next, this review summarizes ML algorithms for crystallization behavior prediction and process regulation. ML models support drug solubility prediction, particle agglomeration prediction, and spherical crystal design. ML-based in situ image processing can extract particle information and recognize crystal products. The application scenarios of ML algorithms utilized in crystallization processes and two control strategies based on supersaturation regulation and image processing are also presented. Finally, emerging techniques and the outlook of ML in drug molecular design and industrial crystallization processes are outlined.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.005
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.007
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.005
Threshold uncertainty score0.027

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0050.007
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.001
Bibliometrics0.0020.003
Science and technology studies0.0000.002
Scholarly communication0.0030.004
Open science0.0020.001
Research integrity0.0020.004
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.001

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.

Opus teacher head0.005
GPT teacher head0.219
Teacher spread0.214 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designTheoretical or conceptual
Domainnot available
GenreReview

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

Citations5
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueEngineeringSame topicMachine Learning in Materials ScienceFrench-language works237,207