MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4412654790 · doi:10.1021/acsnano.5c04200

Artificial Intelligence for Materials Discovery, Development, and Optimization

2025· review· en· W4412654790 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueACS Nano · 2025
Typereview
Languageen
FieldMaterials Science
TopicMachine Learning in Materials Science
Canadian institutionsKootenay Association for Science & Technology
FundersNational Research Foundation of Korea
KeywordsArtificial intelligenceComputer scienceInterpretabilityMachine learningDeep learningBenchmarkingData scienceReinforcement learningRobustness (evolution)

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This review highlights the recent transformative impact of artificial intelligence (AI), machine learning (ML), and deep learning (DL) on materials science, emphasizing their applications in materials discovery, development, and optimization. AI-driven methods have revolutionized materials discovery through structure generation, property prediction, high-throughput (HT) screening, and computational design while advancing development with improved characterization and autonomous experimentation. Optimization has also benefited from AI's ability to enhance materials design and processes. The review will introduce fundamental AI and ML concepts, including supervised learning, unsupervised learning, semi-supervised learning, and reinforcement learning (RL), alongside advanced DL models such as recurrent neural networks (RNNs), convolutional neural networks (CNNs), graph neural networks (GNNs), generative models, and Transformer-based models, which are critical for analyzing complex material data sets. It also covers core topics in materials informatics, including structure-property relationships, material descriptors, quantitative structure-property relationships (QSPR), and strategies for managing missing data and small data sets. Despite these advancements, challenges such as inconsistent data quality, limited model interpretability, and a lack of standardized data-sharing frameworks persist. Future efforts will focus on improving robustness, integrating causal reasoning and physics-informed AI, and leveraging multimodal models to enhance scalability and transparency, unlocking new opportunities for more advanced materials discovery, development, and optimization. Furthermore, the integration of quantum computing with AI will enable faster and more accurate results, and ethical frameworks will ensure responsible human-AI collaboration, addressing concerns of bias, transparency, and accountability in decision-making.

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.

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)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Other design · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.944
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0010.000
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 head0.049
GPT teacher head0.347
Teacher spread0.298 · 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