4.6 Article

Machine learning for autonomous crystal structure identification

期刊

SOFT MATTER
卷 13, 期 27, 页码 4733-4745

出版社

ROYAL SOC CHEMISTRY
DOI: 10.1039/c7sm00957g

关键词

-

资金

  1. Princeton Institute for Computational Science and Engineering (PICSciE)
  2. Office of Information and Technology's High Performance Computing Center and Visualization Laboratory at Princeton University
  3. Princeton Center for Complex Materials (PCCM)
  4. U.S. National Science Foundation Materials Research Science and Engineering Center [DMR-1420541]
  5. U.S. National Science Foundation [CBET-1402166]
  6. Department of Defense, Air Force Office ofScientific Research, National Defense Science and Engineering Graduate (NDSEG) Fellowship [FA950-11-C-0028, 32 CFR 168a]
  7. National Science Foundation [OCI-0725070, ACI-1238993]
  8. state of Illinois
  9. National Science Foundation CAREER Award [DMR-1350008]
  10. Direct For Mathematical & Physical Scien
  11. Division Of Materials Research [1841800] Funding Source: National Science Foundation
  12. Directorate For Engineering
  13. Div Of Chem, Bioeng, Env, & Transp Sys [1402166] Funding Source: National Science Foundation

向作者/读者索取更多资源

We present a machine learning technique to discover and distinguish relevant ordered structures from molecular simulation snapshots or particle tracking data. Unlike other popular methods for structural identification, our technique requires no a priori description of the target structures. Instead, we use nonlinear manifold learning to infer structural relationships between particles according to the topology of their local environment. This graph-based approach yields unbiased structural information which allows us to quantify the crystalline character of particles near defects, grain boundaries, and interfaces. We demonstrate the method by classifying particles in a simulation of colloidal crystallization, and show that our method identifies structural features that are missed by standard techniques.

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

4.6
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