Pith. sign in

REVIEW 3 major objections 6 minor 204 references

Materials Behavior as Mechanism Ensembles: A Probabilistic Framework for Emergent Behaviors

T0 review · 3 major / 6 minor · reviewed 2026-07-30 · grok-4.5

Challenge this review Re-run · record.json Download PDF Read on arXiv ↗

Pith's one-line read Materials behavior is a probabilistic ensemble of competing unit mechanisms, not a deterministic map from structure to properties.

desk verdict Solid program statement that reframes fatigue as mechanism competition; the math is standard, the hard identification step is openly unsolved, and it deserves referee time as a perspective. read the letter →

arxiv 2607.27163 v1 pith:27OMDK7U submitted 2026-07-29 cond-mat.mtrl-sci

Brad L. Boyce , Mitchell A. Wood , Krishna Garikipati , Andreas E. Robertson , Jeffrey Larson , Ishan Srivastava , Bert Debusschere , Saaketh Desai
show 11 more authors
Prasad Iyer Pieterjan Robbe Mathew Cherukara Todd Munson Ming Du Trupti Mohanty David J. Gardner Laurent Capolungo Benjamin A. Jasperson Jingye Tan Rémi Dingreville
This is my paper · ORCID
classification cond-mat.mtrl-sci
keywords FatigueMultiscalematerialsProbabilisticmodelinginformaticsMultimodaldatafusionMechanismensemblesCrackself-healing
verification ladder T0 review T1 audit T2 compute T3 formal

The pith

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

The reading

This perspective argues that important materials phenomena emerge from the conditional activation of many unit mechanisms rather than from any single irreversible process. Fatigue crack growth is the running example: classical Paris-law damage tolerance treats advance as strictly forward, yet experiments show cracks can arrest and partially heal when local microstructure and loading tip the balance among competing processes. The authors propose a portable probabilistic framework that links mechanism activation, local state evolution, and macroscopic observables through coupled conditional distributions whose dependencies are learned from data, not prescribed in advance. Multiscale simulation, multimodal characterization, and machine learning are cast as ways to populate and navigate that landscape so that desired outcomes—such as self-healing—can be made more probable by design. The same logic is offered for other physical and chemical systems in which emergent behavior reflects mechanism competition under changing conditions.

What carries the argument

Three coupled conditional distributions—P({Oi}|St,M) for co-active mechanism sets, P(St+Δt|{Oi},St,M) for state transitions, and P(E|S0:t̃,M0:t̃) for macroscopic observables—together with coarse-graining operators that label unit mechanisms from lower-scale trajectories. They carry the argument by making the topology of mechanism dependencies a scientific unknown to be inferred, not a constitutive assumption.

What would settle it

Fuse multiscale simulations with multimodal fatigue experiments, learn the conditional probability of crack reversal, then test whether that landscape prospectively predicts when cracks heal or arrest under withheld microstructures and loads; failure to forecast those tails outside the training set would refute the central claim.

Watch

Extended reading notes

Core claim

Complex material phenomena are best understood and designed as conditional probabilistic superpositions of identifiable unit mechanisms. Emergent outcomes such as fatigue crack growth, arrest, and self-healing are set by joint distributions over co-active mechanisms, state transitions, and macroscopic observables, so damage tolerance becomes an inference and optimization problem over mechanism competition rather than a deterministic irreversible process.

Load-bearing premise

That unit mechanisms can be cleanly identified and labeled from lower-scale data, and that how they depend on each other can be learned from simulations and partial experiments well enough to predict and steer outcomes.

Editorial extensions

If this is right

  • Damage tolerance can be reframed as Bayesian optimization of the probability of crack arrest or self-healing, not only of Paris-law growth rates.
  • Multiscale simulation and multimodal characterization become complementary inputs to one shared probability landscape rather than separate validation exercises.
  • The same conditional-probability logic ports to radiation damage, heterogeneous catalysis, and the subcritical transition to turbulence.
  • Exceptional properties can be engineered by reshaping mechanism probabilities through grain-size gradients, boundary character, and residual stress.
  • Community repositories of mechanism-labeled conditional probabilities become as central as conventional structure–property databases.

Reading between the lines

Editorial extensions of the paper, not claims the author makes directly.

  • If coarse-graining can be automated, scatter once dismissed as measurement noise becomes primary signal about the tails of mechanism competition.
  • Closed-loop agentic simulation–experiment cycles would make materials design look more like adaptive control of a moving probability landscape than one-shot optimization.
  • Treating mechanism-dependency topology as latent rather than prescribed would force reinterpretation of phenomenological constants (Paris C and m, rate-theory coefficients) as averages over static mechanism mixes.
Share X Bluesky LinkedIn Reddit HN

Editorial analysis

A structured set of objections, weighed in public.

Desk editor's note, referee report, and a circularity audit.

Referee Report

3 major / 6 minor

Summary. This perspective proposes that complex materials behavior, especially fatigue crack growth, arrest, and self-healing, be treated as conditional probabilistic ensembles of identifiable unit mechanisms rather than as deterministic structure–property maps or irreversible Paris-law advance. It introduces three coupled conditionals—P({Oi}|St,M), P(St+Δt|{Oi},St,M), and P(E|S0:t̃,M0:t̃)—links activation rates to transition-state theory and Poisson event counts, and shows that marginalization (Eq. 2) recovers a probabilistic generalization of the Paris law in which C and m are calibration averages. A pedagogical crack-tip example (O1–O3), a hierarchical simulation “mechanism atlas,” multimodal latent-space fusion, and Bayesian/closed-loop elicitation of rare outcomes (e.g. P(Δa<0)) are outlined, with Barr et al. nanoscale self-healing as the empirical anchor and brief extensions to radiation damage, catalysis, and subcritical turbulence.

Significance. If the program can be executed, it would reframe damage tolerance as inference and design over mechanism competition, giving a principled place for multiscale simulation, multimodal characterization, and ML inside a single conditional-probability language, and offering a portable template for other systems dominated by competing stochastic pathways. Strengths include an internally consistent formal skeleton (three conditionals, TST rates, Eq. 2 marginalization), explicit demotion of Paris constants to averages rather than circular refits, honest listing of open assumptions (identifiability, automated coarse-graining, continual updating), real experimental anchors (Barr et al.), and public code/data for the illustrative figures. As a perspective it does not claim new verified mechanics; its value is architectural and programmatic.

major comments (3)
  1. [§3.1–3.2, §6, §8] §3.1–3.2 and the control claims in §6: the load-bearing entry condition is that coarse-graining operators ci can extract labeled, dependency-preserving mechanism occurrences from lower-scale trajectories when couplings are non-local (the pile-up/solute regime flagged in the Introduction). The pedagogical example defines O1–O3 a priori rather than recovering them, and §8 correctly lists automated coarse-graining as open. The manuscript should state more sharply that every later stage (atlas, fusion, Bayesian elicitation of P(Δa<0|{Oi},S,M)) is conditional on operational ci success, and sketch at least one concrete falsifiable test (e.g. recovery of known reverse pathways from labeled MD/TEM streams) so the design ambition is not read as already actionable.
  2. [§3.2, Eqs. (1)–(2)] Eq. (1)–(2) and the Poisson/weak-dependence approximation: the text notes that event counts may be treated as Poisson “when dependencies are weak over Δt,” yet the rare reverse outcomes (arrest, self-healing) that motivate the framework are precisely those expected when state-mediated couplings are strong. Please clarify how the joint P({Oi}|St,M) and the super-basin picture are to be estimated when the Poisson factorization fails, and what that implies for the variance of Δa that is said to encode tail phenomena—otherwise Eq. 2’s practical use for P(Δa<0) remains underspecified.
  3. [Abstract, Highlights, §6] Abstract, Highlights, and §6 present “reframing damage tolerance as inference” and “eliciting” exceptional behavior in language that can be read as near-term capability. The body is clearer that this is forward-looking. Align front matter and §6 with the §1/§8 stance (what may become possible; fidelity for prospective control unproven) so the central claim is not oversold relative to the evidence shipped.
minor comments (6)
  1. [Figure 1] Figure 1 caption: “(g)-(f) crack regrowth events” appears to be a typo (likely (g)–(h)).
  2. [Nomenclature / §3] Nomenclature lists N both as fatigue cycles and as the index bound on {Oi}N_i=1; a brief disambiguation in the text would help.
  3. [§4.2] §4.2 heading “collective energy energies” is redundant; “collective energy barriers” matches the body.
  4. [§6.2] §6.2: “embedded fro instance” → “for instance”.
  5. [CRediT] CRediT lists “B.S.” among co-authors for writing; no B.S. appears in the author list—please correct.
  6. [Front matter] Graphical abstract is referenced but not described in text; a one-sentence pointer would help readers of the PDF-only version.

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged · score 0.0 of 10

No significant circularity: a perspective framework that defines conditional distributions and marginal expectations without fitting inputs and relabeling them as predictions.

full rationale

This is a forward-looking perspective, not a closed derivation that forces a numerical claim from its own fitted inputs. The three coupled conditionals P({Oi}|St,M), P(St+Δt|{Oi},St,M), and P(E|S0:t̃,M0:t̃) are postulated structure; Eq. 2 then defines the expected crack increment by marginalizing those distributions—standard probabilistic bookkeeping, not a self-definitional trick that smuggles the target into the premise. Paris-law C and m are explicitly demoted to calibration averages over mechanism/microstructure distributions rather than presented as first-principles outputs. The pedagogical O1–O3 set is labeled as illustrative and a priori, not recovered and then ‘predicted.’ Self-citations (Barr et al. healing observations; authors’ prior ML/fusion/AMD work; the DLIE cycle) supply experimental motivation and tooling context; none is a load-bearing uniqueness theorem that forbids alternatives or forces the central claim. Open assumptions (identifiability of ci, continual updating) are stated as open, which is the opposite of circular closure. Feasibility risks around coarse-graining are real but are correctness/operational concerns, not circularity. Score 0; steps empty.

Assumptions & free parameters 3 free parameters · 7 assumptions · 3 invented entities

The central program rests on standard probability and TST scaffolding plus several domain and paper-specific working assumptions needed to treat mechanism dependency topology as learnable and controllable. No numerical free parameters are fitted to establish a main result because no main quantitative result is claimed; the ledger is dominated by modeling axioms and named constructs (mechanism atlas, shared latent space, DLIE cycle) that organize future work.

free parameters (3)
  • Time discretization Δt (cycle or few-cycle step)
    Chosen to be long versus individual events and short versus macroscopic damage; sets Poisson means λi=ṗOi Δt and the state-transition grain of the whole model. Not fitted here but load-bearing for any numerical realization.
  • Attempt frequencies ν0,i and site multiplicities Ni(S)
    Enter the TST rate law (Eq. 1) for each mechanism; must be taken from simulation, theory, or experiment when the atlas is populated. Not determined in this paper.
  • Paris-law C, m (as calibration averages)
    Explicitly described as fits to expectations over mechanism/microstructure distributions during calibration, not fundamental constants; appear when connecting the framework to legacy damage-tolerance practice.
assumptions (7)
  • domain assumption Emergent fatigue outcomes arise from conditional co-activation of scale-relative constituent mechanisms Oi rather than a single irreversible mechanism.
    Stated as the central thesis (Abstract, §1, §2); motivated by Barr et al. and nanocrystalline literature but taken as the organizing premise of the framework.
  • ad hoc to paper Joint mechanism activation, state transitions, and macroscopic observables factor as the three conditional distributions in §3.1, with conditional dependencies to be inferred rather than prescribed by constitutive rules.
    Standard probability language applied as the paper’s specific epistemic stance; topology of dependencies is declared a scientific unknown (§3 intro).
  • domain assumption Thermally activated rates ṗOi=ν0,i Ni exp(−ΔGi/kBT) and, when dependencies are weak over Δt, Poisson event counts with mean λi=ṗOi Δt are adequate first approximations.
    Eq. 1 and following text; classical TST/kMC modeling choice, with acknowledgment that strong interactions require super-basin descriptions.
  • ad hoc to paper Global variables M evolve more slowly than local state S; mechanisms are identifiable/labelable; Δt sits between event and macro-damage scales.
    Listed as working assumptions and open community questions in §3.1.
  • ad hoc to paper Coarse-graining operators ci map lower-scale trajectories to mechanism occurrences Oi usable in the probabilistic model.
    Introduced in §3.1–3.2; automation of ci is later called a prerequisite still dependent on domain expertise (§8).
  • domain assumption Multimodal experimental signals and heterogeneous simulations can be aligned in a shared latent representation that preserves mechanism identity well enough for quantitative inference of P(Oi|S,M).
    §5 foundation-model fusion premise; necessary for the Discover–Learn half of the program, not demonstrated at fatigue-mechanism resolution here.
  • ad hoc to paper Once P(E|{Oi},S,M) is learned with sufficient fidelity, Bayesian optimization and microstructural engineering can raise probabilities of desired tails (e.g. P(Δa<0)).
    §6 Elicit-stage claim; conditional on successful inference; only schematic level-set and agent demos are shown.
invented entities (3)
  • Mechanism atlas
    purpose: Named structured, uncertainty-quantified dataset of labeled activations, barriers, branching ratios, and state-transition statistics spanning design variables, serving as simulation-side input to fusion.
    §4.4 introduces the atlas as the primary scientific output of the simulation layers; organizational construct rather than a new physical object.
  • Discover–Learn–Interpret–Elicit (DLIE) cycle
    purpose: Reframes classical PSPP workflow as an AI-integrated scientific cycle ending in prescription of conditions for desired emergence.
    Cited to Tsao et al. and used as the paper’s process scaffold (§1.2, §5–6); programmatic framing device.
  • Shared latent space for experiment–simulation fusion
    purpose: Common embedding in which mechanistically equivalent events cluster across TEM/DIC/SHG and MD/DDD/phase-field modalities.
    §5.1; relies on existing foundation-model ideas; not a new particle or force, but a postulated representational layer the inference pipeline needs.

how reviews work

0 comments
Cite this review

Pith. "Pith review of Materials Behavior as Mechanism Ensembles: A Probabilistic Framework for Emergent Behaviors." pith.science (2026). https://pith.science/paper/27OMDK7U

@misc{pith2026260727163,
  author       = {Pith},
  title        = {Pith review of: Materials Behavior as Mechanism Ensembles: A Probabilistic Framework for Emergent Behaviors},
  year         = {2026},
  howpublished = {\url{https://pith.science/paper/27OMDK7U}},
  note         = {Machine review of arXiv:2607.27163}
}
read the original abstract

Materials behavior is often treated as a deterministic mapping from structure to properties, yet many important phenomena emerge from the conditional activation of multiple mechanisms across scales. This is especially evident in fatigue of metals, where crack growth is typically modeled as monotonic and irreversible process, despite evidence that local microstructure, loading history, and competing unit processes can shift the balance among propagation, arrest, and self-healing. Here we present a probabilistic framework that describes materials behavior as an ensemble of constituent mechanisms whose activation, interaction, and evolution determine emergent outcomes. The framework connects mechanism activation, state evolution, and macroscopic observables in a probabilistic way. In the case of fatigue crack propagation, it reframes damage tolerance as an inference problem over mechanism competition and provides a basis for integrating multiscale simulation, multimodal characterization, and machine learning. The same logic extends to other physical and chemical systems suggesting a portable framework for any system in which emergent behavior reflects mechanism competition under changing conditions. The broader ambition of this perspective review is a shift from correlating structure and performance after the fact to identifying, in advance, the conditions that make desired emergent behavior probable.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 2607.27163 by the authors.

Figure 1
Figure 1. Crack self healing in nanocrystalline metals. [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p006_1.png] view at source ↗
Figure 2
Figure 2. Hierarchical decomposition of the constituent processes and structural features [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p007_2.png] view at source ↗
Figure 3
Figure 3. Probabilistic framework for mechanism interaction. [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p012_3.png] view at source ↗
Figures from the paper (5 more)
Figure 4
Figure 4. Figure 4: Hierarchical simulation pipeline for populating the conditional probability land [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p015_4.png]
Figure 5
Figure 5. Figure 5: Multimodal data fusion architecture for inferring the conditional probability [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p019_5.png]
Figure 6
Figure 6. Figure 6: Foundation-model prediction of spatiotemporal fracture evolution. [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p021_6.png]
Figure 7
Figure 7. Figure 7: Bayesian level-set estimation as an edge-detection strategy for crack-growth [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p023_7.png]
Figure 8
Figure 8. Figure 8: Multi-agent architecture to automate and accelerate molecular dynamics simula [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p024_8.png]

Discussion (0). Continue with ORCID to comment.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

204 extracted references · 81 canonical work pages

  1. [1]

    Risken, Fokker–Planck equation, in: The Fokker–Planck Equation: Methods of Solution and Applications, Springer, 1989, pp

    H. Risken, Fokker–Planck equation, in: The Fokker–Planck Equation: Methods of Solution and Applications, Springer, 1989, pp. 63–95. doi:10.1007/978-3-642-61544-3_4

    doi:10.1007/978-3-642-61544-3_4 1989

  2. [2]

    Jordan, D

    R. Jordan, D. Kinderlehrer, F. Otto, The variational formulation of the Fokker–Planck equation, SIAM Journal on Mathematical Analysis 29 (1998) 1–17. doi:10.1137/S0036141096303359

    doi:10.1137/s0036141096303359 1998

  3. [3]

    Andersen, C

    M. Andersen, C. Panosetti, K. Reuter, A practical guide to surface kinetic Monte Carlo simula- tions, Frontiers in Chemistry 7 (2019) 202. doi:10.3389/fchem.2019.00202

    arXiv 2019

  4. [4]

    Z. Shen, R. Wagoner, W. Clark, Dislocation and grain boundary interactions in metals, Acta Metallurgica 36 (1988) 3231–3242. doi:10.1016/0001-6160(88)90058-2

    work page doi:10.1016/0001-6160(88)90058-2 1988

  5. [5]

    Suhane, D

    A. Suhane, D. Scheiber, M. Popov, V. Razumovskiy, L. Romaner, M. Militzer, Solute drag assessment of grain boundary migration in Au, Acta Materialia 224 (2022) 117473. doi:10.1016/ j.actamat.2021.117473

    arXiv 2022

  6. [6]

    Dingreville, D

    R. Dingreville, D. Aksoy, D. Spearot, A primer on selecting grain boundary sets for comparison of interfacial fracture properties in molecular dynamics simulations, Scientific Reports 7 (2017)

    2017

  7. [7]

    Pineau, D

    A. Pineau, D. McDowell, E. Busso, S. Antolovich, Failure of metals II: Fatigue, Acta Materialia 107 (2016) 484–507. doi:10.1016/j.actamat.2015.05.050

    work page doi:10.1016/j.actamat.2015.05.050 2016

  8. [8]

    D. McDowell, Nonequilibrium statistical thermodynamics of thermally activated dislocation en- sembles: part 1: subsystem reactions under constrained local equilibrium, Journal of Materials Science 59 (2024) 5093–5125. doi:10.1007/s10853-023-09165-0

    work page doi:10.1007/s10853-023-09165-0 2024

Show all 204 references
  1. [9]

    D. McDowell, Nonequilibrium statistical thermodynamics of thermally activated dislocation en- sembles: part 2—ensemble evolution toward correlation of enthalpy barriers, Journal of Materials Science 59 (2024) 5126–5160. doi:10.1007/s10853-023-09142-7

    2024 doi

  2. [10]

    McDowell, Z.-K

    D. McDowell, Z.-K. Liu, Hierarchical nonequilibrium thermodynamics of thermally activated dislocation plasticity of metals and alloys, International Journal of Plasticity (2025) 104303. doi:10.1016/j.ijplas.2025.104303. 28

    2025

  3. [11]

    Brailsford, R

    A. Brailsford, R. Bullough, The rate theory of swelling due to void growth in irradiated metals, Journal of Nuclear Materials 44 (1972) 121–135. doi:10.1016/0022-3115(72)90091-8

    1972 doi

  4. [12]

    Mansur, Void swelling in metals and alloys under irradiation: an assessment of the theory, Nuclear Technology 40 (1978) 5–34

    L. Mansur, Void swelling in metals and alloys under irradiation: an assessment of the theory, Nuclear Technology 40 (1978) 5–34. doi:10.13182/NT78-2

    1978 doi

  5. [13]

    Johnson, Reaction kinetics in process of nucleation and growth, Transactions of the American Institute of Mining and Metallurgical Engineers 135 (1939) 416–458

    W. Johnson, Reaction kinetics in process of nucleation and growth, Transactions of the American Institute of Mining and Metallurgical Engineers 135 (1939) 416–458

    1939

  6. [14]

    Avrami, Kinetics of phase change

    M. Avrami, Kinetics of phase change. I: General theory, The Journal of Chemical Physics 7 (1939) 1103–1112. doi:10.1063/1.1750380

    1939 doi

  7. [15]

    Kolmogorov, On the statistical theory of metal crystallization, Izvestiya Akademii Nauk SSSR, Seriya Matematicheskaya (1937) 335–360

    A. Kolmogorov, On the statistical theory of metal crystallization, Izvestiya Akademii Nauk SSSR, Seriya Matematicheskaya (1937) 335–360

    1937

  8. [16]

    Suresh, Fatigue of Materials, Cambridge University Press, 1998

    S. Suresh, Fatigue of Materials, Cambridge University Press, 1998. doi:10.1017/ CBO9780511806575

    1998

  9. [17]

    Mettu, V

    S. Mettu, V. Shivakumar, J. Beeck, F. Yeh, L. Williams, R. Forman, J. McMahon, J. Newman, NASGRO 3.0: A software for analyzing aging aircraft, in: The Second Joint NASA/FAA/DoD Conference on Aging Aircraft, Pt. 2, 1999

    1999

  10. [18]

    McClung, M

    R. McClung, M. Enright, Y.-D. Lee, J. Moody, J. Sobotka, V. Bhamidipati, S. Fitch, B. Guseman, J. Dubk, N. Howard, et al., Probabilistic integrity and risk assessment of turbine engines (2018). URL:https://rosap.ntl.bts.gov/view/dot/57705

    2018

  11. [19]

    C. Barr, T. Duong, D. Bufford, Z. Milne, A. Molkeri, N. Heckman, D. Adams, A. Srivastava, K. Hattar, M. Demkowicz, et al., Autonomous healing of fatigue cracks via cold welding, Nature 620 (2023) 552–556. doi:10.1038/s41586-023-06223-0

    2023 doi

  12. [20]

    Bufford, D

    D. Bufford, D. Stauffer, W. Mook, S. Syed Asif, B. Boyce, K. Hattar, High cycle fatigue in the transmissionelectronmicroscope, NanoLetters16(2016)4946–4953.doi:10.1021/acs.nanolett. 6b01560

    2016 doi

  13. [21]

    Pierron, C

    O. Pierron, C. Abnet, C. Muhlstein, Methodology for low- and high-cycle fatigue characterization with kHz-frequency resonators, Sensors and Actuators A: Physical 128 (2006) 140–150. doi:10. 1016/j.sna.2006.01.013

    2006

  14. [22]

    Montes de Oca Zapiain, M

    D. Montes de Oca Zapiain, M. Wood, N. Lubbers, C. Pereyra, A. Thompson, D. Perez, Train- ing data selection for accuracy and transferability of interatomic potentials, npj Computational Materials 8 (2022) 189. doi:10.1038/s41524-022-00872-x

    2022 doi

  15. [23]

    Galvelis, A

    R. Galvelis, A. Varela-Rial, S. Doerr, R. Fino, P. Eastman, T. Markland, J. Chodera, G. De Fab- ritiis, NNP/MM: Accelerating molecular dynamics simulations with machine learning potentials and molecular mechanics, Journal of Chemical Information and Modeling 63 (2023) 5701–570...

    2023 doi

  16. [24]

    McCabe, B

    M. McCabe, B. Régaldo-Saint Blancard, L. Parker, R. Ohana, M. Cranmer, A. Bietti, M. Eick- enberg, S. Golkar, G. Krawezik, F. Lanusse, M. Pettee, T. Tesileanu, K. Cho, S. Ho, Multiple physics pretraining for physical surrogate models, arXiv:2310.02994 (2023). doi:10.48550/arXi...

    2023 doi arXiv

  17. [25]

    J. Tsao, R. Abbott, D. Crowder, S. Desai, R. Dingreville, J. Fowler, A. Garland, P. Iyer, J. Mur- dock, S. Steinmetz, et al., AI for technoscientific discovery: A human-inspired architecture, Journal of Creativity 34 (2024) 100077. doi:10.1016/j.yjoc.2024.100077. 29

    2024

  18. [26]

    Dingreville, R

    R. Dingreville, R. Karnesky, G. Puel, J.-H. Schmitt, Review of the synergies between computa- tional modeling and experimental characterization of materials across length scales, Journal of Materials Science 51 (2016) 1178–1203. doi:10.1007/s10853-015-9551-6

    2016 doi

  19. [27]

    Polák, V

    J. Polák, V. Mazánová, M. Heczko, I. Kuběna, J. Man, Profiles of persistent slip markings and internal structure of underlying persistent slip bands, Fatigue & Fracture of Engineering Materials & Structures 40 (2017) 1101–1116. doi:10.1111/ffe.12567

    2017 doi

  20. [28]

    Chowdhury, H

    P. Chowdhury, H. Sehitoglu, Mechanisms of fatigue crack growth—a critical digest of theoretical developments, Fatigue & Fracture of Engineering Materials & Structures 39 (2016) 652–674. doi:10.1111/ffe.12392

    2016 doi

  21. [29]

    Mughrabi, H

    H. Mughrabi, H. Höppel, Cyclic deformation and fatigue properties of very fine-grained metals and alloys, International Journal of Fatigue 32 (2010) 1413–1427. doi:10.1016/j.ijfatigue. 2009.10.007

    2010 doi

  22. [30]

    Padilla, B

    H. Padilla, B. Boyce, A review of fatigue behavior in nanocrystalline metals, Experimental Mechanics 50 (2010) 5–23. doi:10.1007/s11340-009-9301-2

    2010 doi

  23. [31]

    Furnish, D

    T. Furnish, D. Bufford, F. Ren, A. Mehta, K. Hattar, B. Boyce, Evidence that abnormal grain growth precedes fatigue crack initiation in nanocrystalline Ni-Fe, Scripta Materialia 143 (2018) 15–19. doi:10.1016/j.scriptamat.2017.08.047

    2018 doi

  24. [32]

    E. Chen, P. Hamilton, B. Boyce, R. Dingreville, The heterogeneous nature of mechanically accelerated grain growth, Journal of Materials Science 57 (2022) 21743–21755. doi:10.1007/ s10853-022-07974-3

    2022

  25. [33]

    C. Qiu, M. Punke, Y. Tian, Y. Han, S. Wang, Y. Su, M. Salvalaglio, X. Pan, D. Srolovitz, J. Han, Grain boundaries are Brownian ratchets, Science 385 (2024) 980–985. doi:10.1126/science. adp1516

    2024 doi

  26. [34]

    L. Lu, Q. Pan, K. Hattar, B. Boyce, Fatigue and fracture of nanostructured metals and alloys, MRS Bulletin 46 (2021) 258–264. doi:10.1557/s43577-021-00054-y

    2021 doi

  27. [35]

    Farkas, M

    D. Farkas, M. Willemann, B. Hyde, Atomistic mechanisms of fatigue in nanocrystalline metals, Physical Review Letters 94 (2005) 165502. doi:10.1103/PhysRevLett.94.165502

    2005 doi

  28. [36]

    M. Jain, D. Vizoso, A. Hinojos, A. Barrios, K. Dorman, Y. Yang, D. Adams, K. Hattar, D. Medlin, O. Pierron, R. Dingreville, B. Boyce, Putting fatigue to rest via solute-pinned boundaries, Mate- rials Today 93 (2026) 103187. doi:10.1016/j.mattod.2026.103187

    2026

  29. [37]

    Pineau, A

    A. Pineau, A. Benzerga, T. Pardoen, Failure of metals III: Fracture and fatigue of nanostructured metallic materials, Acta Materialia 107 (2016) 508–544. doi:10.1016/j.actamat.2015.07.049

    2016 doi

  30. [38]

    Payam, O

    A. Payam, O. Payton, L. Picco, S. Moore, T. Martin, A. Warren, M. Mostafavi, D. Knowles, Development of fatigue testing system for in-situ observation of stainless steel 316 by HS-AFM & SEM, International Journal of Fatigue 127 (2019) 1–9. doi:10.1016/j.ijfatigue.2019.05.015

    2019 doi

  31. [39]

    Stinville, M

    J. Stinville, M. Charpagne, A. Cervellon, S. Hemery, F. Wang, P. Callahan, V. Valle, T. Pollock, On the origins of fatigue strength in crystalline metallic materials, Science 377 (2022) 1065–1071. doi:10.1126/science.abn0392

    2022 doi

  32. [40]

    Yokota, J

    H. Yokota, J. Kaneshiro, Y. Uesu, Optical second harmonic generation microscopy as a tool of materialdiagnosis, PhysicsResearchInternational2012(2012)704634.doi:10.1155/2012/704634. 30

    2012 doi

  33. [41]

    Shafiei, T

    F. Shafiei, T. Orzali, A. Vert, M.-A. Miri, P. Hung, M. Wong, A. Alù, G. Bersuker, M. Downer, Detection of subsurface, nanometer-scale crystallographic defects by nonlinear light scattering and localization, Advanced Optical Materials 9 (2021) 2002252. doi:10.1002/adom.202002252

    2021 doi

  34. [42]

    Hristu, S

    R. Hristu, S. Stanciu, D. Tranca, A. Matei, G. Stanciu, Nonlinear optical imaging of defects in cubic silicon carbide epilayers, Scientific Reports 4 (2014) 5258. doi:10.1038/srep05258

    2014 doi

  35. [43]

    Bozhevolnyi, J

    S. Bozhevolnyi, J. Beermann, V. Coello, Direct observation of localized second-harmonic enhancement in random metal nanostructures, Physical Review Letters 90 (2003) 197403. doi:10.1103/PhysRevLett.90.197403

    2003 doi

  36. [44]

    Prylepa, C

    A. Prylepa, C. Reitböck, M. Cobet, A. Jesacher, X. Jin, R. Adelung, M. Schatzl-Linder, G. Luck- eneder, K.-H. Stellnberger, T. Steck, J. Faderl, T. Stehrer, D. Stifter, Material characterisation with methods of nonlinear optics, Journal of Physics D: Applied Physics 51 (2018) ...

    2018 doi

  37. [45]

    Rellaford, S

    K. Rellaford, S. Averett, A. Farnsworth, D. Adams, S. Smith, D. Fullwood, J. Patterson, Charac- terization of mechanical deformation in aluminum by optical second harmonic generation, Mea- surement Science and Technology 32 (2021) 075202. doi:10.1088/1361-6501/abe668

    2021 doi

  38. [47]

    G. Xu, M. Demkowicz, Healing of nanocracks by disclinations, Physical Review Letters 111 (2013) 145501. doi:10.1103/PhysRevLett.111.145501

    2013 doi

  39. [48]

    Chakraborty, A

    A. Chakraborty, A. Kohnert, A. Hunter, L. Capolungo, Role of interfaces on the mechanical response of accumulative roll bonded nanometallic laminates investigated via dislocation dy- namics simulations, Journal of Materials Science: Materials Theory 8 (2024) 3. doi:10.1186/ s4...

    2024

  40. [49]

    Bieberdorf, M

    N. Bieberdorf, M. Asta, L. Capolungo, Grain boundary effects in high-temperature liquid-metal dealloying: a multi-phase field study, npj Computational Materials 9 (2023) 127. doi:10.1038/ s41524-023-01076-7

    2023

  41. [50]

    Miehe, F

    C. Miehe, F. Welschinger, M. Hofacker, Thermodynamically consistent phase-field models of fracture: Variational principles and multi-field FE implementations, International Journal for Numerical Methods in Engineering 83 (2010) 1273–1311. doi:10.1002/nme.2861

    2010 doi

  42. [51]

    Miehe, M

    C. Miehe, M. Hofacker, F. Welschinger, A phase field model for rate-independent crack propaga- tion: Robust algorithmic implementation based on operator splits, Computer Methods in Applied Mechanics and Engineering 199 (2010) 2765–2778. doi:10.1016/j.cma.2010.04.011

    2010 doi

  43. [52]

    F. Duda, A. Ciarbonetti, P. Sánchez, A. Huespe, A phase-field/gradient damage model for brittle fracture in elastic–plastic solids, International Journal of Plasticity 65 (2015) 269–296. doi:10. 1016/j.ijplas.2014.09.005

    2015

  44. [53]

    Miehe, S

    C. Miehe, S. Teichtmeister, F. Aldakheel, Phase-field modelling of ductile fracture: a variational gradient-extended plasticity-damage theory and its micromorphic regularization, Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society A: Mathematical, Physical and Engineering Sciences...

    2016

  45. [54]

    Svolos, H

    L. Svolos, H. Mourad, G. Manzini, K. Garikipati, A fourth-order phase-field fracture model: Formulation and numerical solution using a continuous/discontinuous Galerkin method, Journal of the Mechanics and Physics of Solids 165 (2022) 104910. doi:10.1016/j.jmps.2022.104910

    2022

  46. [55]

    Svolos, Q.-T

    L. Svolos, Q.-T. Tran, I. Boureima, V. Anghel, K. Garikipati, H. Mourad, A phase-field fracture formulation for generalized standard materials: The interplay between thermome- chanics and damage, Journal of the Mechanics and Physics of Solids 201 (2025) 106154. doi:10.1016/j.j...

    2025

  47. [56]

    Livingston, S

    E. Livingston, S. Srivastava, J. Holber, H. Mourad, K. Garikipati, Inference of phase field frac- ture models, Journal of the Mechanics and Physics of Solids (2025) 106495. doi:10.2139/ssrn. 5668578

    2025 doi

  48. [57]

    Koller, N

    D. Koller, N. Friedman, Probabilistic Graphical Models: Principles and Techniques, MIT Press, 2009

    2009

  49. [58]

    Kalidindi, A Bayesian framework for materials knowledge systems, MRS Communications 9 (2019) 518–531

    S. Kalidindi, A Bayesian framework for materials knowledge systems, MRS Communications 9 (2019) 518–531. doi:10.1557/mrc.2019.56

    2019 doi

  50. [59]

    Walker, J

    E. Walker, J. Actor, C. Martinez, N. Trask, Flow-based parameterization for DAG and feature discovery in scientific multimodal data, Frontiers in Mechanical Engineering 10 (2024) 1408649. doi:10.3389/fmech.2024.1408649

    2024

  51. [60]

    Robertson, A

    A. Robertson, A. Venkatraman, A. Generale, S. Kalidindi, Probabilistic materials informatics, in: Physical Metallurgy, Elsevier, 2026, pp. 2783–2942. doi:10.1016/B978-0-443-21710-4.00023-9

    2026 doi

  52. [61]

    W. Chen, M. Fuge, Beyond the known: Detecting novel feasible domains over an unbounded design space, Journal of Mechanical Design 139 (2017) 111405. doi:10.1115/1.4037306

    2017 doi

  53. [62]

    Robertson, A

    A. Robertson, A. Generale, C. Kelly, M. Buzzy, S. Kalidindi, MICRO2D: A large, statistically di- verse, heterogeneous microstructure dataset, Integrating Materials and Manufacturing Innovation 13 (2024) 120–154. doi:10.1007/s40192-023-00340-4

    2024 doi

  54. [63]

    Buzzy, A

    M. Buzzy, A. Robertson, P. Chen, S. Kalidindi, PolyMicros: Bootstrapping a foundation model for polycrystalline material structure, arXiv:2506.11055 (2025). doi:10.48550/arXiv.2506.11055

    2025 doi arXiv

  55. [64]

    Plimpton, D

    S. Plimpton, D. Perez, A. Voter, Parallel algorithms for hyperdynamics and local hyperdynamics, The Journal of Chemical Physics 153 (2020). doi:10.1063/5.0014448

    2020 doi

  56. [65]

    Zotov, B

    N. Zotov, B. Grabowski, Entropy of kink pair formation on screw dislocations: an accelerated molecular dynamics study, Modelling and Simulation in Materials Science and Engineering 30 (2022) 065004. doi:10.1088/1361-651X/ac7ac9

    2022 doi

  57. [66]

    Kästner, Umbrella sampling, Wiley Interdisciplinary Reviews: Computational Molecular Sci- ence 1 (2011) 932–942

    J. Kästner, Umbrella sampling, Wiley Interdisciplinary Reviews: Computational Molecular Sci- ence 1 (2011) 932–942. doi:10.1002/wcms.66

    2011 doi

  58. [67]

    Zamora, B

    R. Zamora, B. Uberuaga, D. Perez, A. Voter, The modern temperature-accelerated dynamics approach, Annual Review of Chemical and Biomolecular Engineering 7 (2016) 87–110. doi:10. 1146/annurev-chembioeng-080615-033608

    2016

  59. [68]

    Voter, M

    A. Voter, M. Sørensen, Accelerating atomistic simulations of defect dynamics: hyperdynamics, parallel replica dynamics, and temperature-accelerated dynamics, MRS Online Proceedings Li- brary 538 (1998) 427–439. doi:10.1557/PROC-538-427. 32

    1998 doi

  60. [69]

    D. Shaw, R. Dror, J. Salmon, J. Grossman, K. Mackenzie, J. Bank, C. Young, M. Deneroff, B. Batson, K. Bowers, et al., Millisecond-scale molecular dynamics simulations on Anton, in: ProceedingsoftheConferenceonHighPerformanceComputingNetworking, StorageandAnalysis, 2009, pp. 1–...

    2009

  61. [70]

    Y. Zuo, C. Chen, X. Li, Z. Deng, Y. Chen, J. Behler, G. Csányi, A. Shapeev, A. Thompson, M. Wood, et al., Performance and cost assessment of machine learning interatomic potentials, The Journal of Physical Chemistry A 124 (2020) 731–745. doi:10.1021/acs.jpca.9b08723

    2020 doi

  62. [71]

    Musil, A

    F. Musil, A. Grisafi, A. Bartók, C. Ortner, G. Csányi, M. Ceriotti, Physics-inspired structural representations for molecules and materials, Chemical Reviews 121 (2021) 9759–9815. doi:10. 1021/acs.chemrev.1c00021

    2021

  63. [72]

    doi:10.1016/j.jcp.2024.113073

    J.Goff, C.Sievers, M.Wood, A.Thompson, Permutation-adaptedcompleteandindependentbasis for atomic cluster expansion descriptors, Journal of Computational Physics 510 (2024) 113073. doi:10.1016/j.jcp.2024.113073

    2024

  64. [73]

    Choudhary, D

    K. Choudhary, D. Wines, K. Li, K. Garrity, V. Gupta, A. Romero, J. Krogel, K. Saritas, A. Fuhr, P. Ganesh, et al., JARVIS-leaderboard: a large scale benchmark of materials design methods, npj Computational Materials 10 (2024) 93. doi:10.1038/s41524-024-01259-w

    2024 doi

  65. [74]

    Rohskopf, C

    A. Rohskopf, C. Sievers, N. Lubbers, M. Cusentino, J. Goff, J. Janssen, M. McCarthy, D. Montes Oca de Zapiain, S. Nikolov, K. Sargsyan, et al., FitSNAP: Atomistic machine learning with LAMMPS, Journal of Open Source Software 8 (2023) 5118. doi:10.21105/joss.05118

    2023 doi

  66. [75]

    M. Wood, M. Cusentino, B. Wirth, A. Thompson, Data-driven material models for atomistic simulation, Physical Review B 99 (2019) 184305. doi:10.1103/PhysRevB.99.184305

    2019 doi

  67. [76]

    Bartók, J

    A. Bartók, J. Kermode, N. Bernstein, G. Csányi, Machine learning a general-purpose interatomic potential for silicon, Physical Review X 8 (2018) 041048. doi:10.1103/PhysRevX.8.041048

    2018 doi

  68. [77]

    M. Daw, M. Chandross, Simple parameterization of embedded atom method potentials for FCC alloys, Acta Materialia 248 (2023) 118772. doi:10.1016/j.actamat.2023.118772

    2023

  69. [78]

    Mendelev, M

    M. Mendelev, M. Kramer, C. Becker, M. Asta, Analysis of semi-empirical interatomic potentials appropriate for simulation of crystalline and liquid Al and Cu, Philosophical Magazine 88 (2008) 1723–1750. doi:10.1080/14786430802206482

    2008 doi

  70. [79]

    Sobie, N

    C. Sobie, N. Bertin, L. Capolungo, Analysis of obstacle hardening models using dislocation dynamics: application to irradiation-induced defects, Metallurgical and Materials Transactions A 46 (2015) 3761–3772. doi:10.1007/s11661-015-2935-z

    2015 doi

  71. [80]

    Sobie, L

    C. Sobie, L. Capolungo, D. McDowell, E. Martinez, Scale transition using dislocation dynamics and the nudged elastic band method, Journal of the Mechanics and Physics of Solids 105 (2017) 161–178. doi:10.1016/j.jmps.2017.05.004

    2017 doi

  72. [81]

    Sobie, L

    C. Sobie, L. Capolungo, D. McDowell, E. Martinez, Thermal activation of dislocations in large scale obstacle bypass, Journal of the Mechanics and Physics of Solids 105 (2017) 150–160. doi:10. 1016/j.jmps.2017.05.003

    2017

  73. [82]

    Capolungo, V

    L. Capolungo, V. Taupin, GD3: Generalized discrete defect dynamics, Materials Theory 3 (2019) 1–21. doi:10.1186/s41313-018-0013-9

    2019 doi

  74. [83]

    Montes de Oca Zapiain, J

    D. Montes de Oca Zapiain, J. Stewart, R. Dingreville, Accelerating phase-field-based microstruc- ture evolution predictions via surrogate models trained by machine learning methods, npj Com- putational Materials 7 (2021) 3. doi:10.1038/s41524-020-00471-8. 33

    2021 doi

  75. [84]

    Oommen, K

    V. Oommen, K. Shukla, S. Goswami, R. Dingreville, G. Karniadakis, Learning two-phase mi- crostructure evolution using neural operators and autoencoder architectures, npj Computational Materials 8 (2022) 190. doi:10.1038/s41524-022-00876-7

    2022 doi

  76. [85]

    Oommen, K

    V. Oommen, K. Shukla, S. Desai, R. Dingreville, G. Karniadakis, Rethinking materials simula- tions: Blending direct numerical simulations with neural operators, npj Computational Materials 10 (2024) 145. doi:10.1038/s41524-024-01319-1

    2024 doi

  77. [86]

    Dingreville, A

    R. Dingreville, A. Robertson, V. Attari, M. Greenwood, N. Ofori-Opoku, M. Ramesh, P. Voorhees, Q. Zhang, Benchmarking machine learning strategies for phase-field problems, Modelling and Sim- ulation in Materials Science and Engineering 32 (2024) 065019. doi:10.1088/1361-651X/ad5f4a

    2024 doi

  78. [87]

    Johansson, E

    A. Johansson, E. Weinberg, C. Trott, M. McCarthy, S. Moore, LAMMPS-KOKKOS: Performance portable molecular dynamics across exascale architectures, in: Proceedings of the SC’25 Work- shops of the International Conference for High Performance Computing, Networking, Storage and An...

    2025

  79. [88]

    J. Goff, C. Mullen, S. Yang, O. Starovoytov, M. Wood, Generalized representative structures for atomistic systems, Journal of Physics: Condensed Matter 37 (2024) 075901. doi:10.1088/ 1361-648X/ad9791

    2024

  80. [89]

    Hudson, J

    S. Hudson, J. Larson, J.-L. Navarro, S. Wild, libEnsemble: A library to coordinate the concurrent evaluation of dynamic ensembles of calculations, IEEE Transactions on Parallel and Distributed Systems 33 (2022) 977–988. doi:10.1109/TPDS.2021.3082815

    2022

  81. [90]

    Hudson, J

    S. Hudson, J. Larson, J.-L. Navarro, S. Wild, libEnsemble: A complete Python toolkit for dynamic ensembles of calculations, Journal of Open Source Software 8 (2023) 6031. doi:10.21105/joss. 06031

    2023 doi

  82. [91]

    Bertin, L

    N. Bertin, L. Capolungo, A FFT-based formulation for discrete dislocation dynamics in heteroge- neous media, Journal of Computational Physics 355 (2018) 366–384. doi:10.1016/j.jcp.2017. 11.020

    2018 doi

  83. [92]

    Kohnert, L

    A. Kohnert, L. Capolungo, Spectral discrete dislocation dynamics with anisotropic short range interactions, Computational Materials Science 189 (2021) 110243. doi:10.1016/j.commatsci. 2020.110243

    2021

  84. [93]

    Bamney, L

    D. Bamney, L. Capolungo, Assessing the predictive capabilities of precipitation strengthening models for deformation twinning in Mg alloys using phase-field simulations, Journal of Magnesium and Alloys 11 (2023) 4525–4541. doi:10.1016/j.jma.2023.07.008

    2023 doi

  85. [94]

    Bulatov, F

    V. Bulatov, F. Abraham, L. Kubin, B. Devincre, S. Yip, Connecting atomistic and mesoscale simulations of crystal plasticity, Nature 391 (1998) 669–672. doi:10.1038/35577

    1998 doi

  86. [95]

    Dimiduk, C

    D. Dimiduk, C. Woodward, R. LeSar, M. Uchic, Scale-free intermittent flow in crystal plasticity, Science 312 (2006) 1188–1190. doi:10.1126/science.1123889

    2006 doi

  87. [96]

    Zaiser, Scale invariance in plastic flow of crystalline solids, Advances in Physics 55 (2006) 185–245

    M. Zaiser, Scale invariance in plastic flow of crystalline solids, Advances in Physics 55 (2006) 185–245. doi:10.1080/00018730600583514

    2006 doi

  88. [97]

    Sobie, L

    C. Sobie, L. Capolungo, D. McDowell, E. Martinez, Modal analysis of dislocation vibration and reaction attempt frequency, Acta Materialia 134 (2017) 203–210. doi:10.1016/j.actamat.2017. 02.005. 34

    2017 doi

  89. [98]

    Vizoso, R

    D. Vizoso, R. Dingreville, Dataset of simulated vibrational density of states and X-ray diffraction profiles of mechanically deformed and disordered atomic structures in gold, iron, magnesium, and silicon, Data in Brief 55 (2024) 110689. doi:10.1016/j.dib.2024.110689

    2024

  90. [99]

    Vizoso, R

    D. Vizoso, R. Dingreville, Decoding diffraction and spectroscopy data with machine learning: A tutorial, Journal of Applied Physics 137 (2025). doi:10.1063/5.0255593

    2025 doi

  91. [100]

    Vizoso, A

    D. Vizoso, A. Baker, D. Medlin, S. House, R. Dingreville, A machine-learning approach to measure 3D sample properties from 2D transmission electron microscopy images, Measurement (2025) 119554. doi:10.1016/j.measurement.2025.119554

    2025

  92. [101]

    M. Pinz, G. Weber, J. Stinville, T. Pollock, S. Ghosh, Data-driven Bayesian model-based predic- tion of fatigue crack nucleation in Ni-based superalloys, npj Computational Materials 8 (2022)

    2022

  93. [102]

    Enakoutsa, Y

    K. Enakoutsa, Y. Li, Hierarchical Bayesian inference for multiscale plasticity and dam- age with neural network surrogate models, Mathematics and Mechanics of Solids (2026) 10812865261428579. doi:10.1177/10812865261428579

    2026 doi

  94. [103]

    doi:10.1038/s41524-022-00727-5

    doi

  95. [104]

    Duschatko, J

    B. Duschatko, J. Vandermause, N. Molinari, B. Kozinsky, Uncertainty driven active learning of coarse grained free energy models, npj Computational Materials 10 (2024) 9. doi:10.1038/ s41524-023-01183-5

    2024

  96. [105]

    Y. Tian, S. Bagchi, L. Myhill, G. Po, E. Martinez, Y. Lin, N. Mathew, D. Perez, Data-driven modeling of dislocation mobility from atomistics using physics-informed machine learning, npj computational materials 10 (2024) 219. doi:10.1038/s41524-024-01394-4

    2024 doi

  97. [106]

    Hindmarsh, P

    A. Hindmarsh, P. Brown, K. Grant, S. Lee, R. Serban, D. Shumaker, C. Woodward, SUNDIALS: Suite of nonlinear and differential/algebraic equation solvers, ACM Transactions on Mathematical Software 31 (2005) 363–396. doi:10.1145/1089014.1089020

    2005

  98. [107]

    doi:10.1016/j.cma.2025.118434

    J.Holber, K.Garikipati, Physics-anddata-drivenactivelearningofneuralnetworkrepresentations for free energy density functions of materials from statistical mechanics, Computer Methods in Applied Mechanics and Engineering 448 (2026) 118434. doi:10.1016/j.cma.2025.118434

    2026

  99. [108]

    Reynolds, D

    D. Reynolds, D. Gardner, C. Woodward, R. Chinomona, ARKODE: A flexible IVP solver in- frastructure for one-step methods, ACM Transactions on Mathematical Software 49 (2023). doi:10.1145/3594632

    2023 doi

  100. [109]

    Gardner, D

    D. Gardner, D. Reynolds, C. Woodward, C. Balos, Enabling new flexibility in the SUNDIALS suite of nonlinear and differential/algebraic equation solvers, ACM Transactions on Mathematical Software 48 (2022). doi:10.1145/3539801

    2022 doi

  101. [110]

    Bertin, V

    N. Bertin, V. Bulatov, F. Zhou, Learning dislocation dynamics mobility laws from large-scale MD simulations, npj Computational Materials 10 (2024) 192. doi:10.1038/s41524-024-01378-4

    2024 doi

  102. [111]

    Herman, J

    E. Herman, J. Stewart, R. Dingreville, A data-driven surrogate model to rapidly predict mi- crostructure morphology during physical vapor deposition, Applied Mathematical Modelling 88 (2020) 589–603. doi:10.1016/j.apm.2020.06.046

    2020 doi

  103. [112]

    Teichert, A

    G. Teichert, A. Natarajan, A. Van der Ven, K. Garikipati, Scale bridging materials physics: Active learning workflows and integrable deep neural networks for free energy function representations in alloys, Computer Methods in Applied Mechanics and Engineering 371 (2020) 113281...

    2020

  104. [113]

    Teichert, A

    G. Teichert, A. Natarajan, A. Van der Ven, K. Garikipati, Machine learning materials physics: Integrable deep neural networks enable scale bridging by learning free energy functions, Computer Methods in Applied Mechanics and Engineering 353 (2019) 201–216. doi:10.1016/j.cma.20...

    2019 doi

  105. [114]

    Zhang, K

    X. Zhang, K. Garikipati, Bayesian neural networks for weak solution of PDEs with uncertainty quantification, arXiv:2101.04879 (2021). doi:10.48550/arXiv.2101.04879

    2021 doi arXiv

  106. [115]

    Shojaei, J

    M. Shojaei, J. Holber, S. Das, G. Teichert, T. Mueller, L. Hung, V. Gavini, K. Garikipati, Bridging scales with machine learning: From first principles statistical mechanics to continuum phase field computations to study order–disorder transitions in lixcoo2, Journal of the Me...

    2024

  107. [116]

    Chernatynskiy, S

    A. Chernatynskiy, S. Phillpot, R. LeSar, Uncertainty quantification in multiscale simulation of materials: A prospective, Annual Review of Materials Research 43 (2013) 157–182. doi:10.1146/ annurev-matsci-071312-121708

    2013

  108. [117]

    Zhang, K

    X. Zhang, K. Garikipati, Label-free learning of elliptic partial differential equation solvers with generalizability across boundary value problems, Computer Methods in Applied Mechanics and Engineering 417 (2023) 116214. doi:10.1016/j.cma.2023.116214

    2023

  109. [118]

    Trask, C

    N. Trask, C. Martinez, T. Shilt, E. Walker, K. Lee, A. Garland, D. Adams, J. Curry, M. Dugger, S. Larson, et al., Unsupervised physics-informed disentanglement of multimodal materials data, Materials Today 80 (2024) 286–296. doi:10.1016/j.mattod.2024.09.005

    2024 doi

  110. [119]

    McDowell, Simulation-assisted materials design for the concurrent design of materials and products, JOM 59 (2007) 21–25

    D. McDowell, Simulation-assisted materials design for the concurrent design of materials and products, JOM 59 (2007) 21–25. doi:10.1007/s11837-007-0111-7

    2007 doi

  111. [120]

    Curtarolo, G

    S. Curtarolo, G. Hart, M. Nardelli, N. Mingo, S. Sanvito, O. Levy, The high-throughput highway to computational materials design, Nature Materials 12 (2013) 191–201. doi:10.1038/nmat3568

    2013 doi

  112. [121]

    Walker, N

    E. Walker, N. Trask, C. Martinez, K. Lee, J. Actor, S. Saha, T. Shilt, D. Vizoso, R. Dingreville, B. Boyce, Unsupervised physics-informed disentanglement of multimodal data, Foundations of Data Science 7 (2025) 418–445. doi:10.3934/fods.2024019

    2025 doi

  113. [122]

    Swinburne, Coarse-graining and forecasting atomic material simulations with descriptors, Physical Review Letters 131 (2023) 236101

    T. Swinburne, Coarse-graining and forecasting atomic material simulations with descriptors, Physical Review Letters 131 (2023) 236101. doi:10.1103/PhysRevLett.131.236101

    2023 doi

  114. [123]

    Rosenbrock, E

    C. Rosenbrock, E. Homer, G. Csányi, G. Hart, Discovering the building blocks of atomic systems using machine learning: application to grain boundaries, npj Computational Materials 3 (2017)

    2017

  115. [124]

    doi:10.1038/s41524-017-0027-x

    doi

  116. [125]

    Smolyaninov, A

    I. Smolyaninov, A. Zayats, C. Davis, Near-field second harmonic generation from a rough metal surface, Physical Review B 56 (1997) 9290. doi:10.1103/PhysRevB.56.9290

    1997 doi

  117. [126]

    Ramesh, P

    A. Ramesh, P. Dhariwal, A. Nichol, C. Chu, M. Chen, Hierarchical text-conditional image gener- ation with CLIP latents, arXiv:2204.06125 (2022). doi:10.48550/arXiv.2204.06125

    2022 doi arXiv

  118. [127]

    J. Ock, J. Montoya, D. Schweigert, L. Hung, S. Suram, W. Ye, UniMat: Unifying materials embeddings through multi-modal learning, arXiv:2411.08664 (2024). doi:10.48550/arXiv.2411. 08664

    2024 doi arXiv

  119. [128]

    Rahman, R

    M. Rahman, R. George, M. Elleithy, D. Leibovici, Z. Li, B. Bonev, C. White, J. Berner, R. Yeh, J. Kossaifi, et al., Pretraining codomain attention neural operators for solving multiphysics PDEs, in: Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems, volume 37, 2024, pp. 104035...

    2024 doi

  120. [129]

    Robertson, S

    A. Robertson, S. Kalidindi, Digital representation and quantification of discrete dislocation struc- tures, JOM 73 (2021) 2143–2158. doi:10.1007/s11837-021-04669-z. 36

    2021 doi

  121. [130]

    McCabe, B

    M. McCabe, B. Régaldo-Saint Blancard, L. Parker, R. Ohana, M. Cranmer, A. Bietti, M. Eicken- berg, S. Golkar, G. Krawezik, F. Lanusse, et al., Multiple physics pretraining for spatiotemporal surrogate models, in: Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems, volume 37, 20...

    2024 doi

  122. [131]

    P. Xu, X. Zhu, D. Clifton, Multimodal learning with transformers: A survey, IEEE Transactions on Pattern Analysis and Machine Intelligence 45 (2023) 12113–12132. doi:10.1109/TPAMI.2023. 3275156

    2023 doi

  123. [132]

    Vaswani, N

    A. Vaswani, N. Shazeer, N. Parmar, J. Uszkoreit, L. Jones, A. Gomez, Ł. Kaiser, I. Polosukhin, Attention is all you need, in: Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems, volume 30,

  124. [133]

    Radford, J

    A. Radford, J. Kim, C. Hallacy, A. Ramesh, G. Goh, S. Agarwal, G. Sastry, A. Askell, P. Mishkin, J. Clark, et al., Learning transferable visual models from natural language su- pervision, in: International Conference on Machine Learning, PMLR, 2021, pp. 8748–8763. doi:10.48550...

    2021 doi arXiv

  125. [134]

    Z. Liu, Y. Lin, Y. Cao, H. Hu, Y. Wei, Z. Zhang, S. Lin, B. Guo, Swin transformer: Hierar- chical vision transformer using shifted windows, in: Proceedings of the IEEE/CVF International Conference on Computer Vision, 2021, pp. 10012–10022. doi:10.1109/ICCV48922.2021.00986

    2021

  126. [135]

    Lipton, The mythos of model interpretability: In machine learning, the concept of interpretabil- ity is both important and slippery, Queue 16 (2018) 31–57

    Z. Lipton, The mythos of model interpretability: In machine learning, the concept of interpretabil- ity is both important and slippery, Queue 16 (2018) 31–57. doi:10.1145/3236386.3241340

    2018

  127. [136]

    Oquab, T

    M. Oquab, T. Darcet, T. Moutakanni, H. Vo, M. Szafraniec, V. Khalidov, P. Fernandez, D. Haziza, F. Massa, A. El-Nouby, et al., DINOv2: Learning robust visual features without supervision, arXiv:2304.07193 (2023). doi:10.48550/arXiv.2304.07193

    2023 doi arXiv

  128. [137]

    McCabe, P

    M. McCabe, P. Mukhopadhyay, T. Marwah, B. Blancard, F. Rozet, C. Diaconu, L. Meyer, K. Wong, H. Sotoudeh, A. Bietti, I. Espejo, R. Fear, S. Golkar, T. Hehir, K. Hirashima, G. Krawezik, F. Lanusse, R. Morel, R. Ohana, L. Parker, M. Pettee, J. Shen, K. Cho, M. Cran- mer, S. Ho, ...

    2025 doi arXiv

  129. [138]

    Horwath, X.-M

    J. Horwath, X.-M. Lin, H. He, Q. Zhang, E. Dufresne, M. Chu, S. Sankaranarayanan, W. Chen, S. Narayanan, M. Cherukara, AI-NERD: Elucidation of relaxation dynamics beyond equilibrium through AI-informed X-ray photon correlation spectroscopy, Nature Communications 15 (2024)

    2024

  130. [139]

    Musaelian, S

    A. Musaelian, S. Batzner, A. Johansson, L. Sun, C. Owen, M. Kornbluth, B. Kozinsky, Learning local equivariant representations for large-scale atomistic dynamics, Nature Communications 14 (2023) 579. doi:10.1038/s41467-023-36329-y

    2023 doi

  131. [140]

    Batatia, D

    I. Batatia, D. Kovacs, G. Simm, C. Ortner, G. Csanyi, MACE: Higher order equivariant message passing neural networks for fast and accurate force fields, in: Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems, 2022. doi:10.52202/068431-0830

    2022 doi

  132. [141]

    Murdoch, C

    W. Murdoch, C. Singh, K. Kumbier, R. Abbasi-Asl, B. Yu, Definitions, methods, and applications in interpretable machine learning, Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences 116 (2019) 22071–22080. doi:10.1073/pnas.1900654116

    2019 doi

  133. [142]

    Kozinsky, A

    B. Kozinsky, A. Musaelian, A. Johansson, S. Batzner, Scaling the leading accuracy of deep equiv- ariant models to biomolecular simulations of realistic size, in: Proceedings of the International Conference for High Performance Computing, Networking, Storage and Analysis, 2023,...

    2023

  134. [143]

    Batzner, A

    S. Batzner, A. Musaelian, L. Sun, M. Geiger, J. Mailoa, M. Kornbluth, N. Molinari, T. Smidt, B. Kozinsky, E(3)-equivariant graph neural networks for data-efficient and accurate interatomic potentials, Nature Communications 13 (2022) 2453. doi:10.1038/s41467-022-29939-5. 37

    2022 doi

  135. [144]

    Desai, S

    S. Desai, S. Addamane, J. Tsao, I. Brener, R. Dingreville, P. Iyer, Self-driving lab discovers princi- ples for steering spontaneous emission beyond conventional fourier optics, Nature Communications (2025). doi:10.1038/s41467-025-66916-0

    2025 doi

  136. [145]

    Desai, S

    S. Desai, S. Addamane, J. Tsao, I. Brener, L. Swiler, R. Dingreville, P. Iyer, AutoSciLab: A self- driving laboratory for interpretable scientific discovery, in: Proceedings of the AAAI Conference on Artificial Intelligence, volume 39, 2025, pp. 146–154. doi:10.1609/aaai.v39i1.31990

    2025 doi

  137. [146]

    C. Tan, M. Descoteaux, M. Kotak, G. de Miranda Nascimento, S. Kavanagh, L. Zichi, M. Wang, A. Saluja, Y. Hu, T. Smidt, et al., High-performance training and inference for deep equivariant interatomic potentials, Digital Discovery 5 (2026) 1558–1567. doi:10.1039/D5DD00423C

    2026 doi

  138. [147]

    Andrejevic, T

    N. Andrejevic, T. Zhou, Q. Zhang, S. Narayanan, M. Cherukara, M. Chan, Data-driven discovery of dynamics from time-resolved coherent scattering, npj Computational Materials 10 (2024) 225. doi:10.1038/s41524-024-01365-9

    2024 doi

  139. [148]

    Desai, A

    S. Desai, A. Strachan, Parsimonious neural networks learn interpretable physical laws, Scientific Reports 11 (2021) 12761. doi:10.1038/s41598-021-92278-w

    2021 doi

  140. [149]

    Z. Wang, X. Huan, K. Garikipati, Variational system identification of the partial differential equations governing microstructure evolution in materials: Inference over sparse and spatially unrelated data, Computer Methods in Applied Mechanics and Engineering 377 (2021) 113706...

    2021

  141. [150]

    Generale, A

    A. Generale, A. Robertson, S. Kalidindi, Modeling stochastic conditional dynamics from sparse observations via kernel-stabilized flow matching, arXiv:2411.08314 (2024). doi:10.48550/arXiv. 2411.08314

    2024 doi arXiv

  142. [151]

    Desai, P

    S. Desai, P. Iyer, R. Dingreville, Learning interpretable surface elasticity properties from bulk properties via neural network equation learners, International Journal of Mechanical Sciences (2026) 111218. doi:10.1016/j.ijmecsci.2026.111218

    2026

  143. [152]

    Albergo, E

    M. Albergo, E. Vanden-Eijnden, Building normalizing flows with stochastic interpolants, arXiv:2209.15571 (2022). doi:10.48550/arXiv.2209.15571

    2022 doi arXiv

  144. [153]

    Z. Wang, X. Huan, K. Garikipati, Variational system identification of the partial differential equations governing the physics of pattern-formation: Inference under varying fidelity and noise, Computer Methods in Applied Mechanics and Engineering 356 (2019) 44–74. doi:10.1016/...

    2019 doi

  145. [154]

    A. Tong, K. Fatras, N. Malkin, G. Huguet, Y. Zhang, J. Rector-Brooks, G. Wolf, Y. Ben- gio, Improving and generalizing flow-based generative models with minibatch optimal transport, arXiv:2302.00482 (2023). doi:10.48550/arXiv.2302.00482

    2023 doi arXiv

  146. [155]

    Parra, F

    G. Parra, F. Tobar, Spectral mixture kernels for multi-output Gaussian processes, in: Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems, volume 30, 2017. doi:10.48550/arXiv.1709.01298

    2017 doi arXiv

  147. [156]

    A. Tong, N. Malkin, K. Fatras, L. Atanackovic, Y. Zhang, G. Huguet, G. Wolf, Y. Bengio, Simulation-free Schrödinger bridges via score and flow matching, arXiv:2307.03672 (2023). doi:10. 48550/arXiv.2307.03672. 38

    2023 doi arXiv

  148. [157]

    Lewis, E

    P. Lewis, E. Perez, A. Piktus, F. Petroni, V. Karpukhin, N. Goyal, H. Küttler, M. Lewis, W.-T. Yih, T. Rocktäschel, S. Riedel, D. Kiela, Retrieval-augmented generation for knowledge-intensive NLP tasks, arXiv:2005.11401 (2021). doi:10.48550/arXiv.2005.11401

    2005 doi arXiv

  149. [158]

    Albergo, M

    M. Albergo, M. Goldstein, N. Boffi, R. Ranganath, E. Vanden-Eijnden, Stochastic interpolants with data-dependent couplings, arXiv:2310.03725 (2023). doi:10.48550/arXiv.2310.03725

    2023 doi arXiv

  150. [159]

    Sadybekov, V

    A. Sadybekov, V. Katritch, Computational approaches streamlining drug discovery, Nature 616 (2023) 673–685. doi:10.1038/s41586-023-05905-z

    2023 doi

  151. [160]

    Vriza, M

    A. Vriza, M. Prince, T. Zhou, H. Chan, M. Cherukara, Operating advanced scientific instruments with AI agents that learn on the job, npj Computational Materials (2026). doi:10.21203/rs.3. rs-7706574/v1

    2026 doi

  152. [161]

    Hensman, A

    J. Hensman, A. Matthews, Z. Ghahramani, Scalable variational Gaussian process classification, in: Artificial Intelligence and Statistics, PMLR, 2015, pp. 351–360. doi:10.48550/arXiv.1411.2005

    2015 doi arXiv

  153. [162]

    doi:10.48550/arXiv.2501

    S.Schmidgall, Y.Su, Z.Wang, X.Sun, J.Wu, X.Yu, J.Liu, Z.Liu, E.Barsoum, Agentlaboratory: Using LLM agents as research assistants, arXiv:2501.04227 (2025). doi:10.48550/arXiv.2501. 04227

    2025 doi arXiv

  154. [163]

    Shojaei, R

    M. Shojaei, R. Gulati, B. Jasperson, S. Wang, S. Cimolato, D. Cao, W. Neiswanger, K. Garikipati, AI-university: An LLM-based platform for instructional alignment to scientific classrooms, arXiv:2504.08846 (2025). doi:10.48550/arXiv.2504.08846

    2025 doi arXiv

  155. [164]

    Shahriari, K

    B. Shahriari, K. Swersky, Z. Wang, R. Adams, N. Freitas, Taking the human out of the loop: A review of Bayesian optimization (2016). doi:10.1109/JPROC.2015.2494218

    2016

  156. [165]

    Greenhill, S

    S. Greenhill, S. Rana, S. Gupta, P. Vellanki, S. Venkatesh, Bayesian optimization for adaptive experimental design: A review, IEEE Access 8 (2020). doi:10.1109/ACCESS.2020.2966228

    2020

  157. [166]

    Prince, H

    M. Prince, H. Chan, A. Vriza, T. Zhou, V. Sastry, Y. Luo, M. Dearing, R. Harder, R. Vasudevan, M. Cherukara, Opportunities for retrieval and tool augmented large language models in scientific facilities, npj Computational Materials 10 (2024) 251. doi:10.1038/s41524-024-01423-2

    2024 doi

  158. [167]

    R. Lam, D. Allaire, K. Willcox, Multifidelity optimization using statistical surrogate modeling for non-hierarchical information sources, in: 56th AIAA/ASCE/AHS/ASC Structures, Structural Dynamics, and Materials Conference, 2015. doi:10.2514/6.2015-0143. 39

    2015 doi

  159. [168]

    Gottweis, W.-H

    J. Gottweis, W.-H. Weng, A. Daryin, T. Tu, A. Palepu, P. Sirkovic, A. Myaskovsky, F. Weis- senberger, K. Rong, R. Tanno, et al., Accelerating scientific discovery with co-scientist, arXiv:2502.18864 (2025). doi:10.48550/arXiv.2502.18864

    2025 doi arXiv

  160. [169]

    Poloczek, J

    M. Poloczek, J. Wang, P. Frazier, Multi-information source optimization, in: Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems, 2017. doi:10.48550/arXiv.1603.00389

    2017 doi arXiv

  161. [170]

    Klein, S

    A. Klein, S. Falkner, S. Bartels, P. Hennig, F. Hutter, Fast Bayesian optimization of machine learning hyperparameters on large datasets, in: Proceedings of the 20th International Conference on Artificial Intelligence and Statistics, 2017. doi:10.48550/arXiv.1605.07079

    2017 doi arXiv

  162. [171]

    Huang, T

    D. Huang, T. Allen, W. Notz, R. Miller, Sequential kriging optimization using multiple fidelity evaluations, Structural and Multidisciplinary Optimization 32 (2006). doi:10.1007/ s00158-005-0587-0

    2006

  163. [172]

    Gorodetsky, J

    A. Gorodetsky, J. Jakeman, G. Geraci, MFNets: Data efficient all-at-once learning of multifidelity surrogates as directed networks of information sources, Computational Mechanics 68 (2021) 741–

    2021

  164. [173]

    Kandasamy, G

    K. Kandasamy, G. Dasarathy, J. Schneider, B. Póczos, The multi-fidelity multi-armed bandit, in: Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems, 2016. doi:10.48550/arXiv.1610.09726

    2016 doi arXiv

  165. [174]

    X. Zeng, G. Geraci, A. Gorodetsky, J. Jakeman, R. Ghanem, Boosting efficiency and reducing graph reliance: Basis adaptation integration in Bayesian multi-fidelity networks, Computer Meth- ods in Applied Mechanics and Engineering 436 (2025) 117657. doi:10.1016/j.cma.2024.117657

    2025

  166. [175]

    Swersky, J

    K. Swersky, J. Snoek, R. Adams, Multi-task Bayesian optimization, in: Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems, 2013

    2013

  167. [176]

    Folch, R

    J. Folch, R. Lee, B. Shafei, D. Walz, C. Tsay, M. van der Wilk, R. Misener, Combining multi- fidelity modelling and asynchronous batch Bayesian optimization, Computers and Chemical En- gineering 172 (2023). doi:10.1016/j.compchemeng.2023.108194

    2023

  168. [177]

    Ferran Pousa, S

    A. Ferran Pousa, S. Jalas, M. Kirchen, A. Martinez de la Ossa, M. Thévenet, S. Hudson, J. Larson, A. Huebl, J.-L. Vay, R. Lehe, Bayesian optimization of laser-plasma accelerators assisted by reduced physical models, Physical Review Accelerators and Beams 26 (2023) 084601. doi:...

    2023

  169. [178]

    Larson, M

    J. Larson, M. Menickelly, J. O’Neal, S. Wild, Interpolation-based composite derivative-free opti- mization, 2026. URL:https://github.com/POptUS/IBCDFO. doi:10.11578/dc.20240627.2

    2026 doi

  170. [179]

    J. Jakeman, PyApprox: A software package for sensitivity analysis, Bayesian inference, opti- mal experimental design, and multi-fidelity uncertainty quantification and surrogate modeling, Environmental Modelling & Software 170 (2023) 105825. doi:10.1016/j.envsoft.2023.105825

    2023

  171. [180]

    Zheng, J.-S

    W. Zheng, J.-S. Park, P. Kenesei, A. Ali, Z. Liu, I. Foster, N. Schwarz, R. Kettimuthu, A. Miceli, H. Sharma, Rapid detection of rare events from in situ X-ray diffraction data using machine learning, Journal of Applied Crystallography 57 (2024). doi:10.1107/S160057672400517X

    2024 doi

  172. [181]

    X. Li, L. Lu, J. Li, X. Zhang, H. Gao, Mechanical properties and deformation mechanisms of gradient nanostructured metals and alloys, Nature Reviews Materials 5 (2020) 706–723. doi:10. 1038/s41578-020-0212-2

    2020

  173. [182]

    Larson, S

    J. Larson, S. Billups, Stochastic derivative-free optimization using a trust region framework, Com- putational Optimization and Applications 64 (2016) 619–645. doi:10.1007/s10589-016-9827-z

    2016 doi

  174. [183]

    Zhang, K

    X. Zhang, K. Hattar, Y. Chen, L. Shao, J. Li, C. Sun, K. Yu, N. Li, M. Taheri, H. Wang, et al., Radiation damage in nanostructured materials, Progress in Materials Science 96 (2018) 217–321. doi:10.1016/j.pmatsci.2018.03.002

    2018 doi

  175. [184]

    A. Dunn, R. Dingreville, E. Martínez, L. Capolungo, Synchronous parallel spatially resolved stochastic cluster dynamics, Computational Materials Science 120 (2016) 43–52. doi:10.1016/j. commatsci.2016.04.013

    2016 doi

  176. [185]

    Chard, I

    K. Chard, I. Foster, S. Tuecke, Globus: Research data management as service and platform, in: Practice and Experience in Advanced Research Computing 2017: Sustainability, Success and Impact, 2017, pp. 1–5. doi:10.1145/3093338.3093367

    2017

  177. [186]

    Schauermann, H.-J

    S. Schauermann, H.-J. Freund, Model approach in heterogeneous catalysis: Kinetics and thermodynamics of surface reactions, Accounts of Chemical Research 48 (2015) 2775–2782. doi:10.1021/acs.accounts.5b00237

    2015 doi

  178. [187]

    Kiani, I

    D. Kiani, I. Wachs, Practical considerations for understanding surface reaction mechanisms in- volved in heterogeneous catalysis, ACS Catalysis 14 (2024) 16770–16784. doi:10.1021/acscatal. 4c05188

    2024 doi

  179. [188]

    J. Li, Z. Wang, N. Zhang, T. Shi, E. Gilbert, G. Chen, G. Qian, Crack-tip plasticity mediated grain refinement and its resisting effect on the fatigue short crack growth, International Journal of Plasticity 181 (2024) 104102. doi:10.1016/j.ijplas.2024.104102. 40

    2024

  180. [189]

    Greeley, Theoretical heterogeneous catalysis: Scaling relationships and computational catalyst design, Annual Review of Chemical and Biomolecular Engineering 7 (2016) 605–635

    J. Greeley, Theoretical heterogeneous catalysis: Scaling relationships and computational catalyst design, Annual Review of Chemical and Biomolecular Engineering 7 (2016) 605–635. doi:10.1146/ annurev-chembioeng-080615-034413

    2016

  181. [190]

    S. Dey, G. Dhal, Property and structure of various platinum catalysts for low-temperature carbon monoxide oxidations, Materials Today Chemistry 16 (2020) 100228. doi:10.1016/j.mtchem.2019. 100228

    2020 doi

  182. [191]

    T. Cui, L. Li, C. Ye, X. Li, C. Liu, S. Zhu, W. Chen, D. Wang, Heterogeneous single atom environmental catalysis: Fundamentals, applications, and opportunities, Advanced Functional Materials 32 (2022) 2108381. doi:10.1002/adfm.202108381

    2022 doi

  183. [192]

    Pineda, M

    M. Pineda, M. Stamatakis, Kinetic Monte Carlo simulations for heterogeneous catalysis: Fundamentals, current status, and challenges, The Journal of Chemical Physics 156 (2022). doi:10.1063/5.0083251

    2022 doi

  184. [193]

    D. Chen, C. Shang, Z.-P. Liu, Machine-learning atomic simulation for heterogeneous catalysis, npj Computational Materials 9 (2023) 2. doi:10.1038/s41524-022-00959-5

    2023 doi

  185. [194]

    Bligaard, J

    T. Bligaard, J. Nørskov, S. Dahl, J. Matthiesen, C. Christensen, J. Sehested, The Brønsted– Evans–Polanyi relation and the volcano curve in heterogeneous catalysis, Journal of Catalysis 224 (2004) 206–217. doi:10.1016/j.jcat.2004.02.034

    2004 doi

  186. [195]

    Rangarajan, Learning catalytic kinetic models from data: Current and emerging methods, Current Opinion in Chemical Engineering 52 (2026) 101240

    S. Rangarajan, Learning catalytic kinetic models from data: Current and emerging methods, Current Opinion in Chemical Engineering 52 (2026) 101240. doi:10.1016/j.coche.2026.101240

    2026

  187. [196]

    Avila, D

    M. Avila, D. Barkley, B. Hof, Transition to turbulence in pipe flow, Annual Review of Fluid Mechanics 55 (2023) 575–602. doi:10.1146/annurev-fluid-120720-025957

    2023 doi

  188. [197]

    N. Zhao, F. Dong, Y.-H. Kang, L. Wu, Z. Tang, Research progress and future challenges of CO catalytic oxidation catalysts: Preparation, catalytic performance, reaction mechanism and anti-poisoning strategies, Journal of Materials Chemistry A (2026). doi:10.1039/D5TA09749E

    2026 doi

  189. [198]

    Russakovsky, J

    O. Russakovsky, J. Deng, H. Su, J. Krause, S. Satheesh, S. Ma, Z. Huang, A. Karpathy, A. Khosla, M. Bernstein, et al., ImageNet large scale visual recognition challenge, International Journal of Computer Vision 115 (2015) 211–252. doi:10.1007/s11263-015-0816-y

    2015 doi

  190. [199]

    Horton, P

    M. Horton, P. Huck, R. Yang, J. Munro, S. Dwaraknath, A. Ganose, R. Kingsbury, M. Wen, J. Shen, T. Mathis, et al., Accelerated data-driven materials science with the materials project, Nature Materials 24 (2025) 1522–1532. doi:10.1038/s41563-025-02272-0. 42

    2025 doi

  191. [200]

    T. Mou, H. Pillai, S. Wang, M. Wan, X. Han, N. Schweitzer, F. Che, H. Xin, Bridging the complexity gap in computational heterogeneous catalysis with machine learning, Nature Catalysis 6 (2023) 122–136. doi:10.1038/s41929-023-00911-w

    2023 doi

  192. [203]

    B. Yang, Y. Zhuang, G. Yalnız, V. Mukund, E. Marensi, B. Hof, Discontinuous transition to shear flow turbulence, Nature Physics (2026) 1–6. doi:10.1038/s41567-025-03166-3. 41

    2026 doi

  193. [758]

    doi:10.1007/s00466-021-02042-0

    doi

  194. [2017]

    doi:10.48550/arXiv.1706.03762

    doi arXiv

  195. [5945]

    doi:10.1038/s41467-024-49381-z

    doi

  196. [8332]

    doi:10.1038/s41598-017-08637-z

    doi

Pith tools

Reviewed July 30, 2026 · model on record in the stance chip above.