4.8 Article

Determining Multi-Component Phase Diagrams with Desired Characteristics Using Active Learning

期刊

ADVANCED SCIENCE
卷 8, 期 1, 页码 -

出版社

WILEY
DOI: 10.1002/advs.202003165

关键词

Bayesian optimization; ferroelectrics; machine learning; materials informatics; multi‐ component phase diagrams; shape memory alloys

资金

  1. National Key Research and Development Program of China [2017YFB0702401]
  2. National Natural Science Foundation of China [51671157, 51571156, 51931004]
  3. 111 Project 2.0 [BP2018008]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

This study demonstrates how to predict and experimentally validate phase diagrams for multi-component systems using machine learning methods and Bayesian experimental design, requiring only a few experiments to obtain effective results.
Herein, we demonstrate how to predict and experimentally validate phase diagrams for multi-component systems from a high-dimensional virtual space of all possible phase diagrams involving several elements based on small existing experimental data. The experimental data for bulk phases for known systems represents a sampling from this space, and screening the space allows multi-component phase diagrams with given design criteria to be built. This approach uses machine learning methods to predict phase diagrams and Bayesian experimental design to minimize experiments for refinement and validation, all within an active learning loop. The approach is proven by predicting and synthesizing the ferroelectric ceramic system (1-omega)(Ba0.61Ca0.28Sr0.11TiO3)-omega(BaTi0.888Zr0.0616Sn0.0028Hf0.0476O3) with a relatively high transition temperature and triple point, as well as the NiTi-based pseudo-binary phase diagram (1-omega)(Ti0.309Ni0.485Hf0.20Zr0.006)-omega(Ti0.309Ni0.485Hf0.07Zr0.068Nb0.068) designed for high transition temperature (omega <= 1). Each phase diagram is validated and optimized through only three new experiments. The complexity of these compounds is beyond the reach of today's computational methods.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.8
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据