arxiv: 2605.10539 · v1 · submitted 2026-05-11 · ❄️ cond-mat.mtrl-sci

Recognition: 1 theorem link

· Lean Theorem

Data-driven body-centered cubic phase prediction in cobalt free high-entropy alloys

Mikko J. Alava, Silvia Bonfanti, Tero M\"akinen, Wenyi Huo, Xuliang Luo, Yulin Li

Pith reviewed 2026-05-12 04:49 UTC · model grok-4.3

classification ❄️ cond-mat.mtrl-sci

keywords high-entropy alloyscobalt-freebody-centered cubic phasemachine learningphase predictiondata augmentationsemiempirical parametersGaussian process classification

0 comments

The pith

A machine learning model trained on six semiempirical parameters and augmented data predicts body-centered cubic phase stability in cobalt-free high-entropy alloys at 84 percent accuracy.

A machine-rendered reading of the paper's core claim, the machinery that carries it, and where it could break.

The paper sets out to predict whether cobalt-free high-entropy alloys will form a stable body-centered cubic phase, a property relevant for nuclear and other high-performance uses where cobalt radioactivity poses problems. It combines six established parameters that quantify mixing behavior and atomic characteristics with machine learning, using generative adversarial networks to expand the small set of real experimental examples. After compressing the inputs to five principal components, a Gaussian process classifier reaches 84 percent accuracy and flags mixing enthalpy and atomic size difference as the dominant influences on phase outcome.

Core claim

Integration of the six semiempirical parameters—mixing entropy, mixing enthalpy, atomic size difference, valence electron concentration, d-orbital energy level, and the Ω parameter—with generative adversarial network data augmentation and Gaussian process classification after principal component reduction to five dimensions yields an 84 percent accurate predictor of body-centered cubic phase stability in cobalt-free high-entropy alloys, with mixing enthalpy and atomic size difference emerging as the most influential descriptors.

What carries the argument

Gaussian process classification model applied after dimensionality reduction to five principal components on a dataset expanded by generative adversarial networks using the six semiempirical parameters.

If this is right

Accelerates composition screening for stable BCC cobalt-free high-entropy alloys without extensive trial-and-error experiments.
Directs attention to mixing enthalpy and atomic size difference as primary levers for controlling phase formation.
Supports safer alloy development for nuclear applications by avoiding cobalt.
Shows that limited experimental data can be usefully expanded for phase prediction in multi-principal-element systems.

Where Pith is reading between the lines

These are editorial extensions of the paper, not claims the author makes directly.

The same workflow could be tested on prediction of face-centered cubic or hexagonal phases in the same alloy family.
Simplified design rules might be derived by retaining only the two dominant parameters identified by the model.
If validated on independent alloys, the method could shorten development cycles for other complex structural materials.
Extension to include temperature-dependent stability or mechanical property targets would increase practical utility.

Load-bearing premise

The six semiempirical parameters combined with the synthetic data produced by generative adversarial networks are sufficient to represent the real thermodynamic and structural factors that control body-centered cubic phase stability.

What would settle it

Experimental synthesis and phase identification of new cobalt-free high-entropy alloy compositions where the model's BCC stability prediction disagrees with the observed crystal structure.

read the original abstract

High-entropy alloys (HEAs) are known for superb combination of performance attributes, making them ideal for advanced applications, e.g., nuclear engineering. The concept of cobalt-free HEAs aims to mitigate concerns about cobalt's radioactivity, however, predicting their phase formation remains challenging due to their complex compositions. In this work, we integrate six semiempirical parameters, i.e., mixing entropy ({\Delta}Smix), mixing enthalpy ({\Delta}Hmix), atomic size difference ({\delta}), valence electron concentration (VEC), d-orbital energy level (Md), and the {\Omega} parameter, along with machine learning (ML) to predict the body-centered cubic phase stability in Co free HEAs. To address the limitations of experimental data, generative adversarial networks were used to augment the dataset, thus improving the accuracy of the Gaussian process classification model used for phase prediction. After dimensionality reduction to five principal components, the model achieved an accuracy of 84%, with {\Delta}Hmix and {\delta} identified as the key descriptors influencing phase formation. This approach highlights the synergy of ML and data augmentation in accelerating the design of HEAs for advanced applications.

Editorial analysis

A structured set of objections, weighed in public.

Desk editor's note, referee report, simulated authors' rebuttal, and a circularity audit. Tearing a paper down is the easy half of reading it; the pith above is the substance, this is the friction.

Desk Editor's Note private letter to a colleague

The paper gives an 84% accurate GAN-augmented GP classifier for BCC phases in Co-free HEAs after PCA, but the synthetic data has no reported physical validation so the accuracy may not hold for real alloys.

read the letter

The main takeaway is that six standard semiempirical parameters plus GAN augmentation and PCA let a Gaussian process classifier reach 84% accuracy on BCC versus non-BCC for cobalt-free high-entropy alloys, with mixing enthalpy and atomic size difference emerging as the dominant features. This is a straightforward extension of existing data-driven HEA work to the cobalt-free subset that matters for nuclear applications. The authors correctly spotted that experimental datasets are small and tried to fix it with augmentation, and the feature ranking lines up with long-standing rules of thumb about enthalpy and size mismatch. That part is useful for anyone who wants a quick screening filter before running more expensive calculations or experiments. What is actually new is the specific combination for this alloy class rather than a new method or first-principles insight. The soft spot is the one the stress-test flagged. Nothing in the abstract or summary shows that the GAN outputs were filtered for physical plausibility, checked for moment matching with real data, or validated on a hold-out set of experimental alloys. If the generator creates unphysical combinations of ΔHmix and δ that still get labeled BCC, the classifier can pick up artifacts and the 84% number will not generalize. Dataset size, exact train-test split, and cross-validation procedure are also not stated, which makes it hard to judge how much the accuracy depends on the augmentation step. This is the sort of applied materials-informatics paper that a design group might skim for the feature importance and the reported accuracy, but anyone who needs a reliable predictor would want the validation gaps closed first. I would send it to peer review because the application is timely and the methods are standard enough that referees can quickly check the missing pieces.

Referee Report

3 major / 2 minor

Summary. The manuscript presents a data-driven method to predict body-centered cubic (BCC) phase stability in cobalt-free high-entropy alloys (HEAs) by combining six semiempirical parameters—mixing entropy (ΔSmix), mixing enthalpy (ΔHmix), atomic size difference (δ), valence electron concentration (VEC), d-orbital energy level (Md), and the Ω parameter—with machine learning. Generative adversarial networks (GANs) are employed to augment the limited experimental dataset, and a Gaussian process classification model is trained after principal component analysis (PCA) reduction to five components, achieving 84% accuracy. ΔHmix and δ are identified as the most influential descriptors for phase formation.

Significance. If the reported accuracy and feature importance hold under rigorous validation, the work could provide a useful tool for accelerating the design of Co-free HEAs for applications like nuclear engineering by leveraging ML and data augmentation. The integration of semiempirical parameters with GAN-augmented GP classification represents a practical approach to handling data scarcity in complex alloy systems. However, the absence of detailed validation for the synthetic data and model performance metrics limits the immediate impact.

major comments (3)

[Abstract] The abstract states an 84% accuracy after PCA reduction to five components, but supplies no information on the size of the original experimental dataset, the number of GAN-augmented samples, the train/test split, or the cross-validation procedure used for the Gaussian process classifier. This omission makes it impossible to determine whether the accuracy reflects genuine generalization or exploitation of artifacts in the synthetic data.
[Methods] No post-generation validation, moment matching, or physical-bound filtering is described for the GAN outputs. Without checks that synthetic samples respect observed correlations and bounds in real Co-free HEAs (e.g., ensuring generated ΔHmix and δ pairs remain consistent with experimental phase labels), the central claim that the augmented dataset enables reliable BCC prediction is unsupported.
[Results] The identification of ΔHmix and δ as the key descriptors influencing phase formation is stated after PCA, but the manuscript provides neither quantitative feature-importance scores from the GP model nor ablation results showing performance drop when these parameters are removed. This weakens the claim that they dominate over the other four semiempirical parameters.

minor comments (2)

[Abstract] The abstract uses inline LaTeX markup (e.g., {Δ}Smix); ensure all parameter symbols are rendered consistently in the published version.
[Introduction] A short table summarizing the six semiempirical parameters and their physical meanings would improve readability for readers unfamiliar with HEA literature.

Simulated Author's Rebuttal

3 responses · 0 unresolved

We are grateful for the referee's insightful comments, which have helped us identify areas for improvement in our manuscript. We address each major comment below and plan to make the necessary revisions to enhance the clarity, rigor, and reproducibility of our work.

read point-by-point responses

Referee: [Abstract] The abstract states an 84% accuracy after PCA reduction to five components, but supplies no information on the size of the original experimental dataset, the number of GAN-augmented samples, the train/test split, or the cross-validation procedure used for the Gaussian process classifier. This omission makes it impossible to determine whether the accuracy reflects genuine generalization or exploitation of artifacts in the synthetic data.

Authors: We agree that these details are essential for evaluating generalization. The current manuscript does not explicitly state the original experimental dataset size, number of GAN-augmented samples, train/test split, or cross-validation procedure. In the revised version, we will add these specifics to the methods section (including dataset size from literature, augmentation count, split ratio, and CV folds) and include a concise summary in the abstract to address this concern directly. revision: yes
Referee: [Methods] No post-generation validation, moment matching, or physical-bound filtering is described for the GAN outputs. Without checks that synthetic samples respect observed correlations and bounds in real Co-free HEAs (e.g., ensuring generated ΔHmix and δ pairs remain consistent with experimental phase labels), the central claim that the augmented dataset enables reliable BCC prediction is unsupported.

Authors: We acknowledge that the methods section lacks explicit post-generation validation for the GAN outputs. While the GAN was designed to match the real data distribution, detailed checks such as moment matching, correlation preservation, and physical-bound filtering were not described. In the revision, we will add a new subsection detailing these validation steps, including statistical comparisons and consistency with experimental phase labels, to support the reliability of the augmented data. revision: yes
Referee: [Results] The identification of ΔHmix and δ as the key descriptors influencing phase formation is stated after PCA, but the manuscript provides neither quantitative feature-importance scores from the GP model nor ablation results showing performance drop when these parameters are removed. This weakens the claim that they dominate over the other four semiempirical parameters.

Authors: The key descriptors were identified via their contributions to the principal components and overall model performance, but we agree that quantitative support is needed. The manuscript does not currently include feature-importance scores or ablation studies. In the revised results section, we will add quantitative feature importance from the GP model (e.g., via permutation or sensitivity analysis) and ablation experiments showing accuracy changes when ΔHmix and δ are removed, to strengthen this claim. revision: yes

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged

No circularity: standard semiempirical inputs and ML classification remain independent of target labels

full rationale

The paper computes six established semiempirical parameters (ΔSmix, ΔHmix, δ, VEC, Md, Ω) directly from alloy compositions as fixed inputs, augments the dataset via GAN, applies PCA to five components, and trains a Gaussian process classifier whose output is experimental phase labels. No equation or step defines a parameter in terms of the predicted BCC stability, renames a fitted quantity as a prediction, or relies on a self-citation chain for a uniqueness claim. Feature importance for ΔHmix and δ is post-hoc analysis of pre-existing descriptors, not a tautological reduction. The 84% accuracy is a statistical performance metric on the augmented set rather than a quantity forced by construction from the inputs themselves. The derivation chain is therefore self-contained.

Axiom & Free-Parameter Ledger

1 free parameters · 1 axioms · 0 invented entities

The central claim depends on the domain assumption that the listed semiempirical parameters are adequate descriptors and that GAN augmentation produces data representative of real alloy phase behavior; no new physical entities are introduced.

free parameters (1)

GAN and GP model hyperparameters
Hyperparameters for the generative adversarial network and Gaussian process classifier are necessarily chosen or tuned but not reported in the abstract.

axioms (1)

domain assumption The six semiempirical parameters (ΔSmix, ΔHmix, δ, VEC, Md, Ω) sufficiently encode the factors controlling BCC phase stability in HEAs.
Invoked when integrating the parameters as inputs to the ML model for phase prediction.

pith-pipeline@v0.9.0 · 5529 in / 1356 out tokens · 44625 ms · 2026-05-12T04:49:12.000601+00:00 · methodology

discussion (0)

Lean theorems connected to this paper

Citations machine-checked in the Pith Canon. Every link opens the source theorem in the public Lean library.

IndisputableMonolith/Cost/FunctionalEquation.lean washburn_uniqueness_aczel unclear
integrate six semiempirical parameters... GANs... Gaussian process classification... 84% accuracy... ΔHmix and δ identified as key descriptors

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

51 extracted references · 51 canonical work pages

[1]

C. Wen, Y . Zhang, C. Wang, D. Xue, Y . Bai, S. Antonov, L. Dai, T. Lookman, Y . Su, Machine learning assisted design of high entropy alloys with desired property, Acta Mater. 170 (2019) 109-117

work page 2019
[2]

Cantor, I.T.H

B. Cantor, I.T.H. Chang, P. Knight, A.J.B. Vincent, Microstructural development in equiatomic multicomponent alloys, Mater. Sci. Eng. A 375-377 (2004) 213-218

work page 2004
[3]

Yeh, S.K

J.W. Yeh, S.K. Chen, S.J. Lin, J.Y . Gan, T.S. Chin, T.T. Shun, C.H. Tsau, S.Y . Chang, Nanostructured high -entropy alloys with multiple principal elements: novel alloy design concepts and outcomes, Adv. Eng. Mater. 6 (2004) 299-303

work page 2004
[4]

W. Huo, F. Fang, H. Zhou, Z. Xie, J.K. Shang, J. Jiang. Remarkable strength of CoCrFeNi high-entropy alloy wires at cryogenic and elevated temperatures. Scr. Mater. 141 (2017) 125-128

work page 2017
[5]

Olejarz, W

A. Olejarz, W. Huo, M. Zieliński, R. Diduszko, E. Wyszkowska, A. Kosińska, D. Kalita, I. Jóźwik, M. Chmielewski, F. Fang, Ł. Kurpaska. Microstructure and mechanical properties of mechanically -alloyed CoCrFeNi high -entropy alloys using low ball-to-powder ratio. J. Alloy. Comp. 938 (2023) 168196

work page 2023
[6]

Y . Chen, X. An, S. Zhang, F. Fang, W. Huo, P. Munroe, Z. Xie. Mechanical size effect of eutectic high entropy alloy: Effect of lamellar orientation, J. Mater. Sci. Technol. 82 (2021) 10-20

work page 2021
[7]

Praveen, H.S

S. Praveen, H.S. Kim. High-entropy all oys: Poten tial candidates for high - temperature applications - an overview, Adv. Eng. Mater. 20 (2018) 1700645

work page 2018
[8]

Q. Xu, K. Karimi, A.H. Naghdi, W. Huo, C. Wei, S. Papanikolaou, Nanoindentation responses of NiCoFe medium-entropy alloys from cryogenic to elevated temperatures. J. Iron Steel Res. Int. 31 (2024) 2068-2077

work page 2024
[9]

W. Huo, S. Wang, F. Fang, S. Tan, Ł. Kurpaska, Z. Xie, H. S. Kim and J. Jiang, Microstructure and corrosion resistance of highly <111> oriented electrodeposited CoNiFe medium-entropy alloy films. J. Mater. Res. Technol. 20 (2022) 1677-1684

work page 2022
[10]

S. Wang, H. Yan, W. Huo, A. Davydok, M. Zając, J. Stępień, H. Feng, Z. Xie, J.K. Shang, P.H.C. Camargo, J. Jiang, F. Fang. Interstitial -atom-induced multiple nano - twinned high entropy alloy catalysts for efficient water electrolysis, Appl. Catal. B Environ. Energy 363 (2025) 124791

work page 2025
[11]

W. Huo, S. Wang, F. J. Dominguez -Gutierrez, K. Ren, Ł. Kurpaska, F. Fang, S. Papanikolaou, H.S. Kim and J. Jiang, High -entropy materials for electrocatalytic applications: a review of first-principles modeling and simulation. Mater. Res. Lett. 11 (2023) 713-732

work page 2023
[12]

Barr, J.E

C.M. Barr, J.E. Nathaniel, K.A. Unocic, J. Liu, Y . Zhang, Y . Wang, M.L. Taheri, Exploring radiation induced segregation mechanisms at grain boundaries in equiatomic CoCrFeNiMn high entropy alloy under heavy ion irradiation, Scr. Mater. 156 (2018) 80-84

work page 2018
[13]

Moschetti, P.A

M. Moschetti, P.A. Burr, E. Obbard, J.J. Kruzic, P. Hosemann, B. Gludovatz, Design considerations for high entropy alloys in advanced nuclear applications, J. Nucl. Mater. 567 (2022) 153814

work page 2022
[14]

W. Guo, T. Iwashita, T. Egami, Universal local strain in solid-state amorphization: The atomic size effect in binary alloys, Acta Mater. 68 (2014) 229-237

work page 2014
[15]

Egami, M

T. Egami, M. Ojha, O. Khorgolkhuu, D.M. Nicholson, G.M. Stocks, Lo cal electronic effects and irradiation resistance in high -entropy allo ys, JOM 67 (2015) 2345-2349

work page 2015
[16]

Nagase, P.D

T. Nagase, P.D. Rack, J.H. Noh, T. Egami, In-situ TEM observation of structural changes in nano -crystalline CoCrCuFeNi multicomponent high -entropy alloy (HEA) under fast electron irradiation by high voltage electron microscopy (HVEM), Intermetallics 59 (2015) 32-42

work page 2015
[17]

Pickering, A.W

E.J. Pickering, A.W. Carruthers, P.J. Barron, S.C. Middleburgh, D.E.J. Armstrong, A.S. Gandy, High-entropy alloys for advanced nuclear applications, Entropy 23 (2021) 98

work page 2021
[18]

S.Q. Xia, X. Yang, T.F. Yang, S. Liu, Y . Zhang, Irra diation resistanc e in AlxCoCrFeNi high entropy alloys, JOM 67 (2015) 2340-2344

work page 2015
[19]

Kumar, C

N.A.P.K. Kumar, C. Li, K.J. Leonard, H. Bei, S.J. Zinkle, Microstructural stability and mechanical behavior of FeNiMnCr high entropy alloy under ion irradiation, Acta Mater. 113 (2016) 230-244

work page 2016
[20]

Luebbe, J

M. Luebbe, J. Duan, F. Zhang, J. Poplawsky, H. Pommeranke, M. Arivu, A. Hoffman, M. Buchely, H. Wen, A high-strength precipitation hardened cobalt-free high- entropy alloy, Mater. Sci. Eng. A 870 (2023) 144848

work page 2023
[21]

Cao, H.L

P.P. Cao, H.L. Huang, S.H. Jiang, X.J. Liu, H. Wang, Y . Wu, Z.P. Lu, Microstructural stability and aging behavior of refractory high entropy alloys at intermediate temperatures, J. Mater. Sci. Technol. 122 (2022) 243-254

work page 2022
[22]

Zhou, Y .H

J.L. Zhou, Y .H. Cheng, Y .X. Chen, X.B. Liang, Composition design and preparation process of refractory high -entropy alloys: A review, Int. J. Refract. Met. Hard Mater. 105 (2022) 105836

work page 2022
[23]

W. Huo , H. Shi, X. Ren, J. Zhang, Microstructure and wear behavior of CoCrFeMnNbNi high-entropy alloy c oating by TIG cladding, Adv. Mater. Sci. Eng. (2015) 647351

work page 2015
[24]

Miracle, O.N

D.B. Miracle, O.N. Senkov, A critical review of high entropy alloys and related concepts, Acta Mater. 122 (2017) 448-511

work page 2017
[25]

Zhang, Y .J

Y . Zhang, Y .J. Zhou, J.P. Lin, G.L. Chen, P.K. Liaw, Solid-solution phase formation rules for multi-component alloys, Adv. Eng. Mater. 10 (2008) 534-538

work page 2008
[26]

X. Yang, Y . Zhang, Prediction of high-entropy stabilized solid -solution in multi - component alloys, Mater. Chem. Phys. 132 (2012) 233-238

work page 2012
[27]

Niessen, F.R

A.K. Niessen, F.R. De Boer, R.D. Boom, P.F. De Châtel, W.C.M. Mattens, A.R. Miedema, Model predictions for the enthalpy of formation of transition metal alloys II, Calphad 7 (1983) 51-70

work page 1983
[28]

Egami, Y

T. Egami, Y . Waseda, Atomic size effect on the formability of metallic glasses, J. Non-Cryst. Solids 64 (1984) 113-134

work page 1984
[29]

S. Guo, C. Ng, J. Lu, C.T. Liu, Effect of valence electron concentration on stability of fcc or bcc phase in high entropy alloys, J. Appl. Phys. 109 (2011) 103505

work page 2011
[30]

Guo, Phase selection rules for cast high entropy alloys: an overview, Mater

S. Guo, Phase selection rules for cast high entropy alloys: an overview, Mater. Sci. Technol. 31 (2015) 1223-1230

work page 2015
[31]

Poletti, L

M.G. Poletti, L. Battezzati, Electronic and thermodynamic criteria for the occurrence of high entropy alloys in metallic systems, Acta Mater. 75 (2014) 297-306

work page 2014
[32]

Morinaga, N

M. Morinaga, N. Yukawa, H. Ezaki, H. Adachi, Solid solubilities in transition - metal-based fcc alloys, Philos. Mag. A 51 (1985) 223-246

work page 1985
[33]

Y . Li, Ł. Kurpaska, E. Lu, Z. Xie, H.S. Kim, W. Huo, Body-centered cubic phase stability in cobalt-free refractory high-entropy alloys, Res. Phys. (2024) 107688

work page 2024
[34]

Y . Li, A. Olejarz, Ł. Kurpaska, E. Lu, M.J. Alava, H.S. Kim, W. Huo, Designing cobalt-free face-centered cubic high-entropy alloys: A strategy using d -orbital energy level, Int. J. Refract. Hard Mat. 124 (2024) 106834

work page 2024
[35]

Huang, P

W. Huang, P. Martin, H.L. Zhuang, Machine -learning phase prediction of high - entropy alloys, Acta Mater. 169 (2019) 225-236

work page 2019
[36]

Rao, P.Y

Z. Rao, P.Y . Tung, R. Xie, Y . Wei, H. Zhang, A. Ferrari, T.P.C. Klaver, F. Körmann, P.T. Sukumar, A.K. da Silva, Y . Chen, Z. Li, D. Ponge, J. Neugebauer, O. Gutfleisch, S. Bauer, D. Raabe, Machine learning-enabled high-entropy alloy discovery, Science, 378 (2022) 78-85

work page 2022
[37]

W. Zhu, W. Huo, S. Wang, X. Wang, K. Ren, S. Tan, F. Fang, Z. Xie, J. Jiang, Phase formation prediction of high -entropy alloys : a deep learning study, J. Mater. Res. Technol. 18 (2022) 800-809

work page 2022
[38]

W. Zhu, W. Huo, S. Wang, Ł. Kurpaska, F. Fang, S. Papanikolaou, H.S. Kim, J. Jiang, Machine learning based hardness prediction of high -entropy alloys for laser additive manufacturing, JOM 75 (2023) 5537-5548

work page 2023
[39]

Goodfellow, J

I. Goodfellow, J. Pouget-Abadie, M. Mirza, B. Xu, D. Warde-Farley, S. Ozair, A. Courville, Y Bengio, Generative adversarial nets, Proc. Adv. Neural. Inf. Procc. Syst. 27 (2014)

work page 2014
[40]

Z. Zhou, Y. Shang, X. Liu, Y. Yang, A generative deep learning framework for inverse design of compositionall y complex bulk metallic glasses, npj Comput. Mater. 9 (2023) 15

work page 2023
[41]

L. Zi, WT. Nash, SP. O'Brien, Y. Qiu, RK . Gupta, N . Birbilis, cardiGAN: A generative adversarial network model for design and discovery of multi principal element alloys. J. Mater. Sci. Technol. 125 (2022) 81-96

work page 2022
[42]

C. Chen, H. Zhou, W. Long, G. Wang, J. Ren, Phase prediction for high -entropy alloys using generative adversarial network and active learning based on small datasets. Sci. China Technol. Sci. 12 (2023) 3615-3627

work page 2023
[43]

Miranda-Valdez, T

I.Y . Miranda-Valdez, T. Mäkinen, S. Coffeng, A. Päivänsalo, L. Jannuzzi, L. Viitanen, J. Koivisto, M.J. Alava, Accelerated design of solid bio -based foams for plastics substitutes. Mater. Horiz. 12 (2025) 1855-1862

work page 2025
[44]

Villani, Optimal transport: old and new

C. Villani, Optimal transport: old and new. Berlin: Springer. 388 (2009) 23

work page 2009
[45]

Torsti, T

V. Torsti, T . Mäkinen, S . Bonfanti, Koivisto J, M .J. Alava, Improving the mechanical properties of Cantor -like alloys with Bayesian optimization. APL Mach. Learn. 2 (2024) 016119

work page 2024
[46]

B. Vela, D. Khatamsaz, C. Acemi, I. Karaman, R. Arroyave, Data -augmented modeling for yield strength of refractory high entropy alloys: A bayesian approach. Acta Mater. 261 (2023) 119351

work page 2023
[47]

S. Lee, S. Byeon, H. S. Kim, H. Jin, S. Lee, Deep learning-based phase prediction of high -entropy alloys: Optimization, generation, and explanation. Mater. Des. 197 (2021) 109260

work page 2021
[48]

Luque, A

A. Luque, A. Carrasco, A. Mart in, A. Heras, The impact of class imbalance in classification performance metrics based on the binary confusion matrix. Pattern Recognit. 91 (2019) 216-231

work page 2019
[49]

Q. Han, Z. Lu, S. Zhao, Y . Su, H. Cui, Data -driven based phase constitution prediction in high entropy alloys. Comp. Mater. Sci. 215 (2022) 111774

work page 2022
[50]

S. Hou, M. Sun, M. Bai, D. Lin, Y . Li, W. Liu, A hybrid prediction frame for HEAs based on empirical knowledge and machine learning. Acta Mater. 228 (2022) 117742

work page 2022
[51]

Y . Li, H. Yan, S. Wang, X. Luo, Ł. Kurpaska, F. Fang, J. Jiang, H.S. Kim, W. Huo, Toward predictable phase structures in high -entropy oxides: A strategy for screening multicomponent compositions. Mater. Des. 248 (2024) 113497

work page 2024