MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4411135774 · doi:10.1021/acs.jpcc.4c08333

Machine Learning Insights into Band Alignments of van der Waals Heterostructures

2025· article· en· W4411135774 on OpenAlexaff
Ruofan Shen, Ya-Chao Liu, Wanli Jia, Jia Shi, Yoshiyuki Kawazoe, Vei Wang

Bibliographic record

VenueThe Journal of Physical Chemistry C · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMaterials Science
Topic2D Materials and Applications
Canadian institutionsHatch (Canada)
FundersScientific Research Plan Projects of Shaanxi Education DepartmentNatural Science Foundation of Ningxia ProvinceNational Natural Science Foundation of China
Keywordsvan der Waals forceHeterojunctionMaterials sciencePhysicsComputer scienceCondensed matter physicsChemical physicsNanotechnologyPsychologyQuantum mechanics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The integration of two-dimensional (2D) materials into van der Waals heterostructures (vdWHs) enables the stacking of atomically thin layers through weak vdW interactions, offering tunable properties for next-generation optoelectronic and catalytic applications. In this study, we systematically predicted the band alignment types of over 32,000 vdWHs, constructed by pairing any two of the 256 semiconductor monolayers from the 2D Semiconductor Computational Database (2DSdb) [ J. Phys. Chem. Lett. 2022 13, 11581], based on Anderson’s rule. Nearly 100 features were extracted from the physical properties of these vdWHs to establish a descriptor database for the triclassification of vdWHs using machine learning models, including extreme gradient boosting, random forest, and gradient boosting classifier, achieving accuracy rates between 85 and 87%. SHapley Additive exPlanations (SHAP) analysis identified electronegativity, oxygen fraction, valence electrons in the p -orbital, and lattice constants as the most influential features. The resulting database is expected to provide valuable guidance for experimentalists in designing nanodevices and photocatalysts.

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)0.000
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 score0.011
Threshold uncertainty score0.204

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
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 head0.006
GPT teacher head0.256
Teacher spread0.251 · 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

Citations1
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueThe Journal of Physical Chemistry CSame topic2D Materials and ApplicationsFrench-language works237,207