Benchmarking 34 OpenKIM Nickel Potentials with an Emphasis on Surfaces and Extended Defects
Bibliographic record
Abstract
We present an automated benchmarking suite for face-centered-cubic (FCC) nickel that evaluates 47 quantitative metrics spanning both standard tests (equation of state, elastic constants, surface energies and phonons) and application-specific scenarios such as defect formation and migration, grain boundaries, step edges, close-range interactions, and vacancy cluster energetics. Using this framework, we assess 34 interatomic potentials from the OpenKIM repository, including pairwise, embedded-atom, modified-embedded-atom, angular-dependent, and spectral neighbor analysis potentials (SNAP). Results are compared against ab initio benchmarks compiled from the literature. Most potentials accurately reproduce lattice parameters, elastic constants, and surface energies, whereas predictive accuracy degrades for migration barriers and short-range compression. Principal-component analysis identifies correlated property groups and a partially orthogonal component associated with migration and short-range physics, revealing Pareto trade-offs between accuracy domains. SNAP models occupy the lowest-error frontier, although several embedded-atom potentials remain competitive across many metrics. The framework provides a reproducible baseline for potential selection, highlights systematic limitations across formalisms, and supports benchmarking-in-the-loop strategies for developing next-generation machine-learning potentials for Ni and Ni-based alloys.
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 | 0.002 | 0.007 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.002 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.005 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.007 | 0.002 |
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".