MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4415054321 · doi:10.1088/1361-6463/ae11c1

The 2026 active metamaterials roadmap

2025· article· en· W4415054321 on OpenAlexaff
Simon Pope, Diane J. Roth, Aakash Bansal, Mostafa A. Mousa, Ashkan Rezanejad, Antonio Elia Forte, G. R. Nash, Lawrence Singleton, Felix Langfeldt, Jordan Cheer, Stephen Henthorn, Ian R. Hooper, E. Hendry, Alexander W. Powell, Anton Souslov, Eric Plum, C.H. de Groot, Otto L. Muskens, Joe Shields, Carlota Ruíz de Galarreta, C. David Wright, Coşkun Kocabaş, M. Said Ergoktas, Jianling Xiao, Sebastian A. Schulz, Andrea Di Falco, Alexey V. Krasavin, Anatoly V. Zayats, J. B. Pendry

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Physics D Applied Physics · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicModular Robots and Swarm Intelligence
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Waterloo
FundersEuropean Research CouncilDefence Science and Technology GroupRoyal Academy of EngineeringInnovate UKSimons FoundationSimons Society of FellowsUK Research and InnovationEngineering and Physical Sciences Research CouncilDefence Science and Technology Laboratory
KeywordsMetamaterialPoint (geometry)Range (aeronautics)Energy (signal processing)Societal impact of nanotechnology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Active metamaterials (AMMs) are engineered structures that possess novel properties that can be changed after the point of manufacture. Their novel properties arise predominantly from their physical structure, as opposed to their chemical composition and can be changed through means such as direct energy addition into wave paths, or physically changing/morphing the structure in response to both a user or environmental input. AMMs are currently of wide interest to the physics community and encompass a range of sub-domains in applied physics (e.g. photonic, microwave, acoustic, mechanical, etc). They possess the potential to provide solutions that are more suitable to specific applications, or which allow novel properties to be produced which cannot be achieved with passive metamaterials, such as time-varying or gain enhancement effects. They have the potential to help solve some of the important current and future problems faced by the advancement of modern society, such as achieving net-zero, sustainability, healthcare and equality goals. Despite their huge potential, the added complexity of their design and operation, compared to passive metamaterials creates challenges to the advancement of the field, particularly beyond theoretical and lab-based experiments. This roadmap brings together experts in all types of AMMs and across a wide range of areas of applied physics. The objective is to provide an overview of the current state of the art and the associated current/future challenges, with the hope that the required advances identified create a roadmap for the future advancement and application of this field.

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)0.004
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 score0.091
Threshold uncertainty score0.304

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0050.004
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0020.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0020.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0030.004
Open science0.0020.004
Research integrity0.0070.003
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0910.051

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 head0.011
GPT teacher head0.233
Teacher spread0.222 · 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

Citations4
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Physics D Applied PhysicsSame topicModular Robots and Swarm IntelligenceFrench-language works237,207