Generating New Coordination Compounds via Multireference Simulations, Genetic Algorithms, and Machine Learning: The Case of Co(II) and Dy(III) Molecular Magnets
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The design of coordination compounds with target properties often requires years of continuous feedback loop between theory, simulations, and experiments. In the case of magnetic molecules, this conventional strategy has indeed led to the breakthrough of single-molecule magnets with working temperatures above liquid nitrogen's boiling point, but at significant costs in terms of resources and time. Here, we propose a computational strategy capable of accelerating the discovery of new coordination compounds with the desired electronic and magnetic properties. Our approach is based on a combination of high-throughput multireference ab initio methods, genetic algorithms, and machine learning. While genetic algorithms allow for an intelligent sampling of the vast chemical space available, machine learning reduces the computational cost by prescreening molecular properties in advance of their accurate and automated multireference ab initio characterization. Importantly, the presented framework is able to generate novel organic ligands and explore chemical motifs beyond those available in pre-existing structural databases. We showcase the power of this approach by automatically generating new Co-(II) and Dy-(III) mononuclear coordination compounds with record magnetic properties in a fraction of the time required by either experiments or brute-force ab initio approaches. In the case of Dy compounds, simulations uncover new nontrivial chemical strategies toward pentagonal bipyramidal complexes with record-breaking values of magnetic anisotropy.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".