Machine Learning Surrogate Model for Acceleration of Ferroelectric Phase-Field Modeling
Source abstract
Abstract
Phase-field modeling is a powerful technique for predicting domain structure evolution and electromechanical properties of ferroelectric materials. However, it remains computationally very expensive, thus demanding high computing resources and restraining its use for exploring large systems. Some machine learning approaches have already been proposed to accelerate general phase-field simulations. Here, we present a specifically neural-network-trained model for ferroelectric phase-field modeling, including supervised and nonsupervised learning from Landau energy. A surrogate model predicts the microstructural polarization field evolution determining the electrostatic and mechanical equilibrium at each time step. The model produces accurate and stable rollout predictions, up to hundreds of frames even when starting from the beginning of the simulation. With a relative error contained below 5% compared to a high-fidelity phase field, we show that our model can be used instead of real solvers to conduct full simulations. While being at least 685 times faster than the classical phase-field computation, our approach opens a path to explore ferroelectric materials at a larger scale with fewer computing resources.
Source: openalex_inverted_index · Quality: baseline
Research context
OpenAlex topics: Machine Learning in Materials Science · Ferroelectric and Negative Capacitance Devices · Ferroelectric and Piezoelectric Materials
SciVX discovery tags are terminology-based. OpenAlex topics are source-provided classifications.
Affiliations
Univ Lyon, INSA Lyon, CNRS, Ecole Centrale de Lyon, Université Claude Bernard Lyon 1, CPE Lyon, INL, UMR5270, 69621 Villeurbanne, France
References (35)
Show source-provided references
1. 10.1126/science.246.4936.140010.1126/science.246.4936.1400 ↗
2. 10.1002/adfm.20180752310.1002/adfm.201807523 ↗
3. 10.1038/nnano.2015.11410.1038/nnano.2015.114 ↗
4. 10.1063/1.488989210.1063/1.4889892 ↗
5. Zienkiewicz O. C. · 2000 · 2
6. Cottrell J. A. · 200910.1002/9780470749081 ↗
7. 10.1002/aelm.20220007710.1002/aelm.202200077 ↗
8. Pfaff, T.; Fortunato, M.; Sanchez-Gonzalez, A.; Battaglia, P. W. Learning mesh-based simulation with graph networks, arXiv:2010.03409. arXiv.org e-Print archive, 2020. https://doi.org/10.48550/arXiv.2010.03409.
9. Fu, X.; Xie, T.; Rebello, N. J.; Olsen, B. D.; Jaakkola, T. Simulate time-integrated coarse-grained molecular dynamics with geometric machine learning. arXiv:2204.10348. arXiv.org e-Print archive, 2022. https://doi.org/10.48550/arXiv.2204.10348.
10. 10.1002/qua.2483610.1002/qua.24836 ↗
11. Jia, W.; Wang, H.; Chen, M.; Lu, D.; Lin, L.; Car, R.; Weinan, E.; Zhang, L. In Pushing the Limit of Molecular Dynamics with Ab Initio Accuracy to 100 Million Atoms with Machine Learning, SC20: International Conference for High Performance Computing, Networking, Storage and Analysis, 2020; pp 1–14.10.1109/SC41405.2020.00009 ↗
12. Sanchez-Gonzalez, A.; Godwin, J.; Pfaff, T.; Ying, R.; Leskovec, J.; Battaglia, P. In Learning to Simulate Complex Physics with Graph Networks, International Conference on Machine Learning; PMLR, 2020; pp 8459–8468.
13. 10.1017/jfm.2022.73810.1017/jfm.2022.738 ↗
14. Ummenhofer, B.; Prantl, L.; Thuerey, N.; Koltun, V. In Lagrangian Fluid Simulation with Continuous Convolutions, International Conference on Learning Representations, 2020.
15. Tompson, J.; Schlachter, K.; Sprechmann, P.; Perlin, K. In Accelerating Eulerian Fluid Simulation with Convolutional Networks, International Conference on Machine Learning, 2017; pp 3424–3433.
16. 10.1038/s41524-020-00471-810.1038/s41524-020-00471-8 ↗
17. Peivaste, I.; Siboni, N. H.; Alahyarizadeh, G.; Ghaderi, R.; Svendsen, B.; Raabe, D.; Mianroodi, J. R. Accelerating phase-field-based simulation via machine learning. arXiv:2205.02121. arXiv.org e-Print archive, 2022 https://doi.org/10.48550/arXiv.2205.02121.
18. 10.1038/s41524-022-00876-710.1038/s41524-022-00876-7 ↗
19. 10.1038/s42256-021-00302-510.1038/s42256-021-00302-5 ↗
20. 10.1038/s41524-022-00890-910.1038/s41524-022-00890-9 ↗
21. 10.1016/j.cma.2019.05.01910.1016/j.cma.2019.05.019 ↗
22. 10.1016/j.cma.2019.11279010.1016/j.cma.2019.112790 ↗
23. 10.1016/S1359-6454(01)00360-310.1016/S1359-6454(01)00360-3 ↗
24. 10.1016/j.actamat.2003.10.01110.1016/j.actamat.2003.10.011 ↗
25. 10.1016/j.actamat.2013.08.05510.1016/j.actamat.2013.08.055 ↗
26. Xie Y. · 2020 · 33 · 20320
27. 10.1038/s41586-020-2649-210.1038/s41586-020-2649-2 ↗
28. 10.1038/s41592-019-0686-210.1038/s41592-019-0686-2 ↗
29. Abadi, M.; Agarwal, A.; Barham, P.; Brevdo, E.; Chen, Z.; Citro, C.; Corrado, G. S.; Davis, A.; Dean, J.; Devin, M.; Ghemawat, S.; Goodfellow, I.; Harp, A.; Irving, G.; Isard, M.; Jia, Y.; Jozefowicz, R.; Kaiser, L.; Kudlur, M.; Levenberg, J.; Mane, D.; Monga, R.; Moore, S.; Murray, D.; Olah, C.; Schuster, M.; Shlens, J.; Steiner, B.; Sutskever, I.; Talwar, K.; Tucker, P.; Vanhoucke, V.; Vasudevan, V.; Viegas, F.; Vinyals, O.; Warden, P.; Wattenberg, M.; Wicke, M.; Yu, Y.; Zheng, X. Tensorflow: Large-scale machine learning on heterogeneous distributed systems. arXiv:1603.04467. arXiv.org e-Print archive, 2016. https://doi.org/10.48550/arXiv.1603.04467.
30. Kingma, D. P.; Ba, J. L.Adam: A method for stochastic optimization. arXiv:1412.6980. arXiv.org e-Print archive, 2015. https://doi.org/10.48550/arXiv.1412.6980.
31. 10.1088/1361-665X/aafff810.1088/1361-665X/aafff8 ↗
32. 10.1111/j.1151-2916.1998.tb02367.x10.1111/j.1151-2916.1998.tb02367.x ↗
33. 10.1103/PhysRevB.96.18410910.1103/PhysRevB.96.184109 ↗
34. Albawi, S.; Mohammed, T. A.; Al-Zawi, S. In Understanding of a Convolutional Neural Network, 2017 International Conference on Engineering and Technology (ICET), IEEE, 2017; pp 1–6.10.1109/ICEngTechnol.2017.8308186 ↗
35. Ioffe, S.; Szegedy, C. In Batch Normalization: Accelerating Deep Network Training by Reducing Internal Covariate Shift, International Conference on Machine Learning; PMLR, 2015; pp 448–456.