journal article·2023-11-22

Predicting Free Energies of Exfoliation and Solvation for Graphitic Carbon Nitrides Using Machine Learning

Ehsan Shahini, Narendra Chaulagain, Karthik Shankar, Tian Tang

ACS Applied Materials & Interfaces· Volume 15· Issue 46
Publisher page

Abstract

As a metal-free and visible-light-responsive photocatalyst, graphitic carbon nitride (g-C 3 N 4 ) has emerged as a new research hotspot and has attracted broad attention in the field of solar energy conversion and thin-film transistors. Liquid-phase exfoliation (LPE) is the best-known method for the synthesis of 2D g-C 3 N 4 nanosheets. In LPE, bulk g-C 3 N 4 is exfoliated in a solvent via high-shear mixing or sonication in order to produce a stable suspension of individual nanosheets. Two parameters of importance in gauging the performance of a solvent in LPE are the free energy required to exfoliate a unit area of layered materials into individual sheets in the solvent (Δ G exf ) and the solvation free energy per unit area of a nanosheet (Δ G sol ). While approximations for the free energies exist, they are shown in our previous work to be inaccurate and incapable of capturing the experimentally observed efficacy of LPE. Molecular dynamics (MD) simulations can provide accurate free-energy calculations, but doing so for every single solvent is time- and resource-consuming. Herein, machine learning (ML) algorithms are used to predict Δ G exf and Δ G sol for g-C 3 N 4 . First, a database for Δ G exf and Δ G sol is created based on a series of MD simulations involving 49 different solvents with distinct chemical structures and properties. The data set also includes values of critical descriptors for the solvents, including density, surface tension, dielectric constant, etc. Different ML methods are compared, accompanied by descriptor selection, to develop the most accurate model for predicting Δ G exf and Δ G sol . The extra tree regressor is shown to be the best performer among the six ML methods studied. Experimental validation of the model is conducted by performing dispersibility tests in several solvents for which the free energies are predicted. Finally, the influence of the selected descriptors on the free energies is analyzed, and strategies for solvent selection in LPE are proposed.
Source: openalex_inverted_index · Quality: baseline

Research context

OpenAlex topics: Machine Learning in Materials Science · Graphene research and applications · 2D Materials and Applications

SciVX discovery tags are terminology-based. OpenAlex topics are source-provided classifications.

Affiliations

Department of Mechanical Engineering, University of Alberta, Edmonton, AB T6G 1H9, Canada

Department of Electrical and Computer Engineering, University of Alberta, Edmonton, AB T6G 1H9, Canada

Funding

Canada Research Chairs · Natural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada

References (76)

Show source-provided references
1. 10.1002/ADFM.20210254010.1002/ADFM.202102540 ↗
2. 10.1016/j.seppur.2021.11976910.1016/j.seppur.2021.119769 ↗
3. 10.1016/j.carbon.2018.08.04310.1016/j.carbon.2018.08.043 ↗
4. 10.3390/nano1202029410.3390/nano12020294 ↗
5. 10.1002/smll.20160205610.1002/smll.201602056 ↗
6. 10.1016/j.jechem.2021.04.05710.1016/j.jechem.2021.04.057 ↗
7. 10.1016/j.cej.2022.14106710.1016/j.cej.2022.141067 ↗
8. 10.1021/acsami.1c0855010.1021/acsami.1c08550 ↗
9. 10.1088/1361-6528/ABEDEC10.1088/1361-6528/ABEDEC ↗
10. 10.1016/J.JCIS.2022.06.09710.1016/J.JCIS.2022.06.097 ↗
11. 10.1016/j.apsusc.2019.14482610.1016/j.apsusc.2019.144826 ↗
12. 10.1016/j.molliq.2021.11659210.1016/j.molliq.2021.116592 ↗
13. 10.1021/acs.jpcc.6b0944610.1021/acs.jpcc.6b09446 ↗
14. 10.1021/acsnano.5b0268310.1021/acsnano.5b02683 ↗
15. 10.1021/ja106428410.1021/ja1064284 ↗
16. 10.1038/s41598-018-35008-z10.1038/s41598-018-35008-z ↗
17. 10.1021/la903188a10.1021/la903188a ↗
18. 10.1126/science.119497510.1126/science.1194975 ↗
19. 10.1016/j.apcatb.2020.11955710.1016/j.apcatb.2020.119557 ↗
20. 10.1007/s10853-018-03266-x10.1007/s10853-018-03266-x ↗
21. 10.1016/j.jcis.2022.10.15010.1016/j.jcis.2022.10.150 ↗
22. 10.1021/ci034243x10.1021/ci034243x ↗
23. Reichardt C. · 201010.1002/9783527632220 ↗
24. 10.1021/acs.jpcb.2c0530610.1021/acs.jpcb.2c05306 ↗
25. 10.1038/s41467-022-28041-010.1038/s41467-022-28041-0 ↗
26. 10.1016/j.cej.2021.12930710.1016/j.cej.2021.129307 ↗
27. 10.1039/D1OB01066B10.1039/D1OB01066B ↗
28. 10.3390/MOLECULES2606153410.3390/MOLECULES26061534 ↗
29. 10.1038/s41524-019-0262-410.1038/s41524-019-0262-4 ↗
30. 10.1021/acsami.0c0353610.1021/acsami.0c03536 ↗
31. 10.1021/acs.jpclett.1c0333510.1021/acs.jpclett.1c03335 ↗
32. 10.1186/s11671-018-2702-310.1186/s11671-018-2702-3 ↗
33. 10.1016/j.carbon.2018.09.08210.1016/j.carbon.2018.09.082 ↗
34. 10.1039/c2ee03479d10.1039/c2ee03479d ↗
35. 10.1016/j.ijhydene.2019.04.05710.1016/j.ijhydene.2019.04.057 ↗
36. 10.1007/s13738-022-02562-310.1007/s13738-022-02562-3 ↗
37. 10.1073/pnas.040803710210.1073/pnas.0408037102 ↗
38. 10.1021/jp003919d10.1021/jp003919d ↗
39. 10.1021/acs.jctc.5b0041410.1021/acs.jctc.5b00414 ↗
40. 10.1126/science.119497510.1126/science.1194975 ↗
41. 10.1021/ct200731v10.1021/ct200731v ↗
42. 10.1007/978-1-4020-9783-6_310.1007/978-1-4020-9783-6_3 ↗
43. 10.1002/JCC.2311710.1002/JCC.23117 ↗
44. Tukey, J. Exploratory Data Analysis, 1977.
45. 10.1007/s10994-006-6226-110.1007/s10994-006-6226-1 ↗
46. 10.1016/S0167-9473(01)00065-210.1016/S0167-9473(01)00065-2 ↗
47. Schapire R. E. · 2013 · 3710.1007/978-3-642-41136-6_5 ↗
48. 10.1038/s41598-021-93120-z10.1038/s41598-021-93120-z ↗
49. 10.3390/RS1102018510.3390/RS11020185 ↗
50. 10.1006/mchj.1993.101210.1006/mchj.1993.1012 ↗
51. Hall M. A. · Comput. Sci. · 1998 · 20 · 181
52. Shroff, K. P.; Maheta, H. H. In A Comparative Study of Various Feature Selection Techniques in High-Dimensional Data Set to Improve Classification Accuracy, 2015 International Conference on Computer Communication and Informatics, ICCCI 2015, 2015.10.1109/ICCCI.2015.7218098 ↗
53. Pedregosa F. · J. Mach. Learn. Res. · 2011 · 12 · 2825
54. 10.1016/0021-9991(77)90121-810.1016/0021-9991(77)90121-8 ↗
55. 10.1002/jcc.54013081210.1002/jcc.540130812 ↗
56. 10.1007/s11356-018-1326-610.1007/s11356-018-1326-6 ↗
57. 10.1016/0021-9991(76)90078-410.1016/0021-9991(76)90078-4 ↗
58. 10.1002/jcc.2029110.1002/jcc.20291 ↗
59. 10.1080/0026897840010108110.1080/00268978400101081 ↗
60. Allen, M. P.; Tildesley, D. J. Computer Simulation of Liquid, 2017.10.1093/oso/9780198803195.001.0001 ↗
61. 10.1021/jp103120q10.1021/jp103120q ↗
62. 10.1063/1.162405710.1063/1.1624057 ↗
63. 10.1021/ct050225610.1021/ct0502256 ↗
64. 10.1021/ci400053610.1021/ci4000536 ↗
65. Efron, B.; Tibshirani, R. An Introduction to the Bootstrap, 1994.10.1201/9780429246593 ↗
66. 10.1038/s41524-018-0081-z10.1038/s41524-018-0081-z ↗
67. 10.1016/j.jmat.2017.08.00210.1016/j.jmat.2017.08.002 ↗
68. 10.1002/anbr.20200010610.1002/anbr.202000106 ↗
69. 10.1007/s10994-018-5714-410.1007/s10994-018-5714-4 ↗
70. 10.1007/s13369-016-2379-910.1007/s13369-016-2379-9 ↗
71. 10.1016/j.jmat.2021.03.00710.1016/j.jmat.2021.03.007 ↗
72. 10.1038/s41598-020-67683-210.1038/s41598-020-67683-2 ↗
73. 10.1016/j.apcatb.2019.01.04310.1016/j.apcatb.2019.01.043 ↗
74. 10.1039/c3ta12212c10.1039/c3ta12212c ↗
75. 10.1039/c1jm10342c10.1039/c1jm10342c ↗
76. Lundberg, S. M.; Allen, P. G.; Lee, S.I. A Unified Approach to Interpreting Model Predictions.