Average band gaps and formation energies over 50 modifications. The grey horizontal line indicates the target band gap of 1.4 eV. The colored dots on the x-axis indicate the average number of modifications taken for each method to reach the target. For formation energy, the goal is to achieve the lowest possible value.
A clear look at using LLMs for materials discovery. This post summarizes how Victor from Lila Sciences and the author compare their AI workflows, focusing on mutations in crystal structures, machine learning force fields (MLFF), and machine learning property predictors (MLPP). It explains why data limits push researchers toward direct reasoning with AI, the role of modification history and self-reflection, and how prompts influence performance. Key takeaways include constraints in rare-earth-free magnet design, the balance between control and relaxation, and the impact of self-reflection on speeding up convergence to target properties like band gap and formation energy. The notes also touch on challenges with crystal symmetry, CIF generation, and future work in MLIP/MLPP accuracy. A practical read for anyone exploring automated materials discovery and AI-driven design.
