Progress toward the computational discovery of new metal–organic framework adsorbents for energy applications

1. Li, H., Eddaoudi, M., O’Keeffe, M. & Yaghi, O. M. Design and synthesis of an exceptionally stable and highly porous metal–organic framework. Nature 402, 276–279 (1999).10.1038/46248 ↗

2. Horike, S., Shimomura, S. & Kitagawa, S. Soft porous crystals. Nat. Chem. 1, 695–704 (2009).10.1038/nchem.444 ↗

3. Li, H. et al. Porous metal–organic frameworks for gas storage and separation: status and challenges. EnergyChem 1, 100006 (2019).10.1016/j.enchem.2019.100006 ↗

4. Li, J.-R., Sculley, J. & Zhou, H.-C. Metal–organic frameworks for separations. Chem. Rev. 112, 869–932 (2011).10.1021/cr200190s ↗

5. Sumida, K. et al. Carbon dioxide capture in metal–organic frameworks. Chem. Rev. 112, 724–781 (2012).10.1021/cr2003272 ↗

6. Farrusseng, D., Aguado, S. & Pinel, C. Metal–organic frameworks: opportunities for catalysis. Angew. Chem. Int. Ed. 48, 7502–7513 (2009).10.1002/anie.200806063 ↗

7. Gascon, J., Corma, A., Kapteijn, F. & Llabrés I Xamena, F. X. Metal organic framework catalysis: quo vadis? ACS Catal. 4, 361–378 (2013).10.1021/cs400959k ↗

8. Kreno, L. E. et al. Metal–organic framework materials as chemical sensors. Chem. Rev. 112, 1105–1125 (2011).10.1021/cr200324t ↗

9. Wang, S. et al. A robust large-pore zirconium carboxylate metal–organic framework for energy-efficient water-sorption-driven refrigeration. Nat. Energy 3, 985–993 (2018).10.1038/s41560-018-0261-6 ↗

10. Linnane, E., Haddad, S., Melle, F., Mei, Z. & Fairen-Jimenez, D. The uptake of metal-organic frameworks: a journey into the cell. Chem. Soc. Rev. 51, 6065–6086 (2022).10.1039/D0CS01414A ↗

11. Farha, O. K. et al. Metal–organic framework materials with ultrahigh surface areas: is the sky the limit? J. Am. Chem. Soc. 134, 15016–15021 (2012).10.1021/ja3055639 ↗

12. Moghadam, P. Z. et al. Development of a Cambridge Structural Database subset: a collection of metal–organic frameworks for past, present and future. Chem. Mater. 29, 2618–2625 (2017). This database of already-existing MOFs contains >100,000 MOFs and is maintained and updated by the Cambridge Crystallographic Data Centre (CCDC) every quarter.10.1021/acs.chemmater.7b00441 ↗

13. Zhang, Z. et al. Metal–organic frameworks for water harvesting: machine learning-based prediction and rapid screening. ACS Sustain. Chem. Eng. 11, 8148–8160 (2023).10.1021/acssuschemeng.3c01233 ↗

14. Demir, H., Daglar, H., Gulbalkan, H. C., Aksu, G. O. & Keskin, S. Recent advances in computational modeling of MOFs: from molecular simulations to machine learning. Coord. Chem. Rev. 484, 215112 (2023).10.1016/j.ccr.2023.215112 ↗

15. Bai, X. et al. Machine-learning-assisted high-throughput computational screening of metal–organic framework membranes for hydrogen separation. Chem. Eng. J. 446, 136783 (2022).10.1016/j.cej.2022.136783 ↗

16. Moosavi, S. M. et al. A data-science approach to predict the heat capacity of nanoporous materials. Nat. Mater. 21, 1419–1425 (2022).10.1038/s41563-022-01374-3 ↗

17. Getman, R. B., Bae, Y.-S., Wilmer, C. E. & Snurr, R. Q. Review and analysis of molecular simulations of methane, hydrogen and acetylene storage in metal-organic frameworks. Chem. Rev. 112, 703–723 (2011).10.1021/cr200217c ↗

18. Farha, O. K. & Hupp, J. T. Rational design, synthesis, purification and activation of metal-organic framework materials. Acc. Chem. Res. 43, 1166–1175 (2010).10.1021/ar1000617 ↗

19. Düren, T., Sarkisov, L., Yaghi, O. M. & Snurr, R. Q. Design of new materials for methane storage. Langmuir 20, 2683–2689 (2004). This work is an early example of computational modelling inspiring a MOF for methane storage.10.1021/la0355500 ↗

20. Eddaoudi, M. et al. Systematic design of pore size and functionality in isoreticular MOFs and their application in methane storage. Science 295, 469–472 (2002).10.1126/science.1067208 ↗

21. Allen, M. P. & Tildesley, D. J. Computer Simulation of Liquids, 2nd edition (Oxford Univ. Press, 2017).10.1093/oso/9780198803195.001.0001 ↗

22. Martin, M. G. & Siepmann, J. I. Transferable potentials for phase equilibria. 1. United-atom description of n-alkanes. J. Phys. Chem. B 102, 2569–2577 (1998).10.1021/jp972543+ ↗

23. Mayo, S. L., Olafson, B. D. & Goddard, W. A. DREIDING: a generic force field for molecular simulations. J. Phys. Chem. 94, 8897–8909 (1990).10.1021/j100389a010 ↗

24. Ma, S. et al. Metal-organic framework from an anthracene derivative containing nanoscopic cages exhibiting high methane uptake. J. Am. Chem. Soc. 130, 1012–1016 (2008).10.1021/ja0771639 ↗

25. Peng, Y. et al. Methane storage in metal-organic frameworks: current records, surprise findings and challenges. J. Am. Chem. Soc. 135, 11887–11894 (2013).10.1021/ja4045289 ↗

26. Farha, O. K. et al. De novo synthesis of a metal–organic framework material featuring ultrahigh surface area and gas storage capacities. Nat. Chem. 2, 944–948 (2010).10.1038/nchem.834 ↗

27. Wilmer, C. E. et al. Large-scale screening of hypothetical metal–organic frameworks. Nat. Chem. 4, 83–89 (2012). This work generated 137,953 hypothetical MOFs and used high-throughput computational screening to reveal structure–property relationships for natural gas storage.10.1038/nchem.1192 ↗

28. Wilmer, C. E., Farha, O. K., Bae, Y.-S., Hupp, J. T. & Snurr, R. Q. Structure-property relationships of porous materials for carbon dioxide separation and capture. Energy Environ. Sci. 5, 9849–9856 (2012).10.1039/c2ee23201d ↗

29. Sikora, B. J., Wilmer, C. E., Greenfield, M. L. & Snurr, R. Q. Thermodynamic analysis of Xe/Kr selectivity in over 137,000 hypothetical metal-organic frameworks. Chem. Sci. 3, 2217–2223 (2012).10.1039/c2sc01097f ↗

30. Li, W., Xia, X., Cao, M. & Li, S. Structure–property relationship of metal–organic frameworks for alcohol-based adsorption-driven heat pumps via high-throughput computational screening. J. Mater. Chem. A 7, 7470–7479 (2019).10.1039/C8TA07909A ↗

31. Thornton, A. W. et al. Materials genome in action: identifying the performance limits of physical hydrogen storage. Chem. Mater. 29, 2844–2854 (2017).10.1021/acs.chemmater.6b04933 ↗

32. Ahmed, A. et al. Exceptional hydrogen storage achieved by screening nearly half a million metal–organic frameworks. Nat. Commun. 10, 1568 (2019).10.1038/s41467-019-09365-w ↗

33. Bureekaew, S. & Schmid, R. Hypothetical 3D-periodic covalent organic frameworks: exploring the possibilities by a first principles derived force field. CrystEngComm 15, 1551–1562 (2013).10.1039/c2ce26473k ↗

34. Lee, S. et al. Computational screening of trillions of metal-organic frameworks for high-performance methane storage. ACS Appl. Mater. Interfaces 13, 23647–23654 (2021).10.1021/acsami.1c02471 ↗

35. Martin, R. L. et al. In silico design of three-dimensional porous covalent organic frameworks via known synthesis routes and commercially available species. J. Phys. Chem. C 118, 23790–23802 (2014).10.1021/jp507152j ↗

36. Martin, R. L., Lin, L.-C., Jariwala, K., Smit, B. & Haranczyk, M. Mail-order metal–organic frameworks (MOFs): designing isoreticular MOF-5 analogues comprising commercially available organic molecules. J. Phys. Chem. C 117, 12159–12167 (2013).10.1021/jp401920y ↗

37. Anderson, R. & Gómez-Gualdrón, D. A. Large-scale free energy calculations on a computational metal-organic frameworks database: toward synthetic likelihood predictions. Chem. Mater. 32, 8106–8119 (2020).10.1021/acs.chemmater.0c00744 ↗

38. Kalhor, P. et al. Functional material systems enabled by automated data extraction and machine learning. Adv. Funct. Mater. https://doi.org/10.1002/adfm.202302630 (2023).10.1002/adfm.202302630 ↗

39. Gomez-Gualdron, D. A. et al. Computational design of metal–organic frameworks based on stable zirconium building units for storage and delivery of methane. Chem. Mater. 26, 5632–5639 (2014).10.1021/cm502304e ↗

40. Rappe, A. K., Casewit, C. J., Colwell, K. S., Goddard, W. A. & Skiff, W. M. UFF, a full periodic table force field for molecular mechanics and molecular dynamics simulations. J. Am. Chem. Soc. 114, 10024–10035 (1992).10.1021/ja00051a040 ↗

41. Gómez-Gualdrón, D. A. et al. Evaluating topologically diverse metal–organic frameworks for cryo-adsorbed hydrogen storage. Energy Environ. Sci. 9, 3279–3289 (2016).10.1039/C6EE02104B ↗

42. Anderson, R. & Gómez-Gualdrón, D. A. Increasing topological diversity during computational ‘synthesis’ of porous crystals: how and why. CrystEngComm 21, 1653–1665 (2019).10.1039/C8CE01637B ↗

43. Colón, Y. J., Gómez-Gualdrón, D. A. & Snurr, R. Q. Topologically guided, automated construction of metal–organic frameworks and their evaluation for energy-related applications. Cryst. Growth Des. 17, 5801–5810 (2017).10.1021/acs.cgd.7b00848 ↗

44. Boyd, P. G. & Woo, T. K. A generalized method for constructing hypothetical nanoporous materials of any net topology from graph theory. CrystEngComm 18, 3777–3792 (2016).10.1039/C6CE00407E ↗

45. Bureekaew, S., Balwani, V., Amirjalayer, S. & Schmid, R. Isoreticular isomerism in 4,4-connected paddle-wheel metal-organic frameworks: structural prediction by the reverse topological approach. CrystEngComm 17, 344–352 (2015).10.1039/C4CE01574F ↗

46. Keupp, J. & Schmid, R. TopoFF: MOF structure prediction using specifically optimized blueprints. Faraday Discuss. 211, 79–101 (2018).10.1039/C8FD00051D ↗

47. Boyd, P. G. et al. Data-driven design of metal–organic frameworks for wet flue gas CO2 capture. Nature 576, 253–256 (2019). This work generated and screened a library of 325,000 hypothetical MOFs to identify top-performing materialswith preferential adsorption of CO2 over H2O.10.1038/s41586-019-1798-7 ↗

48. Stylianou, K. C. et al. A guest-responsive fluorescent 3D microporous metal–organic framework derived from a long-lifetime pyrene core. J. Am. Chem. Soc. 132, 4119–4130 (2010).10.1021/ja906041f ↗

49. Watanabe, T. & Sholl, D. S. Accelerating applications of metal-organic frameworks for gas adsorption and separation by computational screening of materials. Langmuir 28, 14114–14128 (2012).10.1021/la301915s ↗

50. Goldsmith, J., Wong-Foy, A. G., Cafarella, M. J. & Siegel, D. J. Theoretical limits of hydrogen storage in metal–organic frameworks: opportunities and trade-offs. Chem. Mater. 25, 3373–3382 (2013).10.1021/cm401978e ↗

51. Chung, Y. G. et al. Computation-ready, experimental metal–organic frameworks: a tool to enable high-throughput screening of nanoporous crystals. Chem. Mater. 26, 6185–6192 (2014).10.1021/cm502594j ↗

52. Chung, Y. G. et al. Advances, updates and analytics for the computation-ready, experimental metal-organic framework database: CoRE MOF 2019. J. Chem. Eng. Data 64, 5985–5998 (2019). The CoRE MOF-2019 database contains ~14,000 already-existing MOF structures ready for computational analysis and gas adsorption simulations. The database is open-source and is a community-driven effort to curate the existing MOF structures.10.1021/acs.jced.9b00835 ↗

53. Witman, M. et al. In silico design and screening of hypothetical MOF-74 analogs and their experimental synthesis. Chem. Sci. 7, 6263–6272 (2016).10.1039/C6SC01477A ↗

54. Gee, J. A. et al. Computational identification and experimental evaluation of metal-organic frameworks for xylene enrichment. J. Phys. Chem. C 120, 12075–12082 (2016).10.1021/acs.jpcc.6b03349 ↗

55. Moghadam, P. Z. et al. Computer-aided discovery of a metal–organic framework with superior oxygen uptake. Nat. Commun. 9, 1378 (2018).10.1038/s41467-018-03892-8 ↗

56. Bucior, B. J. et al. Energy-based descriptors to rapidly predict hydrogen storage in metal-organic frameworks. Mol. Syst. Des. Eng. 4, 162–174 (2019).10.1039/C8ME00050F ↗

57. Chen, Z. et al. Balancing volumetric and gravimetric uptake in highly porous materials for clean energy. Science 368, 297–303 (2020).10.1126/science.aaz8881 ↗

58. Kang, M. et al. High-throughput discovery of Ni(IN)2 for ethane/ethylene separation. Adv. Sci. 8, 2004940 (2021).10.1002/advs.202004940 ↗

59. Ren, J. et al. Computer-aided discovery of MOFs with calixarene-analogous microenvironment for exceptional SF6 capture. Chem. Mater. 33, 5108–5114 (2021).10.1021/acs.chemmater.1c01139 ↗

60. Nath, K., Ahmed, A., Siegel, D. J. & Matzger, A. J. Computational identification and experimental demonstration of high-performance methane sorbents. Angew. Chem. Int. Ed. 61, e202203575 (2022).10.1002/anie.202203575 ↗

61. Kim, S.-Y. et al. Discovery of high-performing metal–organic frameworks for on-board methane storage and delivery via LNG-ANG coupling: high-throughput screening, machine learning and experimental validation. Adv. Sci. 9, 2201559 (2022).10.1002/advs.202201559 ↗

62. Park, W., Oh, K. H., Lee, D., Kim, S.-Y. & Bae, Y.-S. Discovery of highly radon-selective metal-organic frameworks through high-throughput computational screening and experimental validation. Chem. Eng. J. 452, 139189 (2023).10.1016/j.cej.2022.139189 ↗

63. Banerjee, D. et al. Metal–organic framework with optimally selective xenon adsorption and separation. Nat. Commun. 7, ncomms11831 (2016). This work demonstrates high-throughput computational screening of large databases of MOFs and identified SBMOF-1 as a highly selective material for xenon/krypton separation.10.1038/ncomms11831 ↗

64. Banerjee, D., Zhang, Z., Plonka, A. M., Li, J. & Parise, J. B. A calcium coordination framework having permanent porosity and high CO2/N2 selectivity. Cryst. Growth Des. 12, 2162–2165 (2012).10.1021/cg300274n ↗

65. Ahmed, A. et al. Balancing gravimetric and volumetric hydrogen density in MOFs. Energy Environ. Sci. 10, 2459–2471 (2017). Following computational screening, IRMOF-20 was experimentally demonstrated to exhibit high usable volumetric and gravimetric capacities for hydrogen storage.10.1039/C7EE02477K ↗

66. Rowsell, J. L. C. & Yaghi, O. M. Effects of functionalization, catenation, and variation of the metal oxide and organic linking units on the low-pressure hydrogen adsorption properties of metal–organic frameworks. J. Am. Chem. Soc. 128, 1304–1315 (2006).10.1021/ja056639q ↗

67. Rosen, A. S. et al. Machine learning the quantum-chemical properties of metal-organic frameworks for accelerated materials discovery. Matter 4, 1578–1597 (2021).10.1016/j.matt.2021.02.015 ↗

68. Zarabadi-Poor, P. & Marek, R. Comment on ‘Database for CO2 separation performances of MOFs based on computational materials screening’. ACS Appl. Mater. Interfaces 11, 16261–16265 (2019).10.1021/acsami.8b15684 ↗

69. Altintas, C., Velioglu, S. & Keskin, S. Reply to comment on ‘Database for CO2 separation performances of MOFs based on computational materials screening’. ACS Appl. Mater. Interfaces 11, 16266–16271 (2019).10.1021/acsami.9b02614 ↗

70. Schneemann, A. et al. Flexible metal-organic frameworks. Chem. Soc. Rev. 43, 6062–6096 (2014).10.1039/C4CS00101J ↗

71. Rogge, S. M. J. et al. Modeling gas adsorption in flexible metal-organic frameworks via hybrid Monte Carlo/molecular dynamics schemes. Adv. Theory Simul. 2, 1800177 (2019).10.1002/adts.201800177 ↗

72. Moghadam, P. Z. et al. Structure–mechanical stability relations of metal–organic frameworks via machine learning. Matter 1, 219–234 (2019).10.1016/j.matt.2019.03.002 ↗

73. Healy, C. et al. The thermal stability of metal-organic frameworks. Coord. Chem. Rev. 419, 213388 (2020).10.1016/j.ccr.2020.213388 ↗

74. Burtch, N. C., Jasuja, H. & Walton, K. S. Water stability and adsorption in metal-organic frameworks. Chem. Rev. 114, 10575–10612 (2014).10.1021/cr5002589 ↗

75. Nandy, A., Duan, C. & Kulik, H. J. Using machine learning and data mining to leverage community knowledge for the engineering of stable metal-organic frameworks. J. Am. Chem. Soc. 143, 17535–17547 (2021).10.1021/jacs.1c07217 ↗

76. Batra, R., Chen, C., Evans, T. G., Walton, K. S. & Ramprasad, R. Prediction of water stability of metal–organic frameworks using machine learning. Nat. Mach. Intell. 2, 704–710 (2020).10.1038/s42256-020-00249-z ↗

77. Farmahini, A. H., Krishnamurthy, S., Friedrich, D., Brandani, S. & Sarkisov, L. Performance-based screening of porous materials for carbon capture. Chem. Rev. 121, 10666–10741 (2021). This work reviews multiscale and performance-based screening workflows for adsorption-based gas separations and carbon capture.10.1021/acs.chemrev.0c01266 ↗

78. Rajagopalan, A. K., Avila, A. M. & Rajendran, A. Do adsorbent screening metrics predict process performance? A process optimisation based study for post-combustion capture of CO2. Int. J. Greenhouse Gas Control 46, 76–85 (2016).10.1016/j.ijggc.2015.12.033 ↗

79. Khurana, M. & Farooq, S. Adsorbent screening for postcombustion CO2 capture: a method relating equilibrium isotherm characteristics to an optimum vacuum swing adsorption process performance. Ind. Eng. Chem. Res. 55, 2447–2460 (2016).10.1021/acs.iecr.5b04531 ↗

80. Leperi, K. T., Chung, Y. G., You, F. & Snurr, R. Q. Development of a general evaluation metric for rapid screening of adsorbent materials for postcombustion CO2 capture. ACS Sustain. Chem. Eng. 7, 11529–11539 (2019).10.1021/acssuschemeng.9b01418 ↗

81. Lin, J.-B. et al. A scalable metal–organic framework as a durable physisorbent for carbon dioxide capture. Science 374, 1464–1469 (2021).10.1126/science.abi7281 ↗

82. Chung, Y. G. et al. In silico discovery of metal–organic frameworks for precombustion CO2 capture using a genetic algorithm. Sci. Adv 2, e1600909 (2016).10.1126/sciadv.1600909 ↗

83. Yao, Z. et al. Inverse design of nanoporous crystalline reticular materials with deep generative models. Nat. Mach. Intell. 3, 76–86 (2021).10.1038/s42256-020-00271-1 ↗

84. Fernandez, M., Woo, T. K., Wilmer, C. E. & Snurr, R. Q. Large-scale quantitative structure–property relationship (QSPR) analysis of methane storage in metal-organic frameworks. J. Phys. Chem. C 117, 7681–7689 (2013).10.1021/jp4006422 ↗

85. Simon, C. M., Mercado, R., Schnell, S. K., Smit, B. & Haranczyk, M. What are the best materials to separate a xenon/krypton mixture? Chem. Mater. 27, 4459–4475 (2015).10.1021/acs.chemmater.5b01475 ↗

86. Anderson, R., Rodgers, J., Argueta, E., Biong, A. & Gómez-Gualdrón, D. A. Role of pore chemistry and topology in the CO2 capture capabilities of MOFs: from molecular simulation to machine learning. Chem. Mater. 30, 6325–6337 (2018).10.1021/acs.chemmater.8b02257 ↗

87. Anderson, R., Biong, A. & Gómez-Gualdrón, D. A. Adsorption isotherm predictions for multiple molecules in MOFs using the same deep learning model. J. Chem. Theory Comput. 16, 1271–1283 (2020).10.1021/acs.jctc.9b00940 ↗

88. Sun, Y. et al. Fingerprinting diverse nanoporous materials for optimal hydrogen storage conditions using meta-learning. Sci. Adv. 7, eabg3983 (2021).10.1126/sciadv.abg3983 ↗

89. Taw, E. & Neaton, J. B. Accelerated discovery of CH4 uptake capacity metal-organic frameworks using Bayesian optimization. Adv. Theory Simul. 5, 2100515 (2022).10.1002/adts.202100515 ↗

90. Deshwal, A., Simon, C. M. & Doppa, J. R. Bayesian optimization of nanoporous materials. Mol. Syst. Des. Eng. 6, 1066–1086 (2021).10.1039/D1ME00093D ↗

91. Jablonka, K. M., Ongari, D., Moosavi, S. M. & Smit, B. Big-data science in porous materials: materials genomics and machine learning. Chem. Rev. 120, 8066–8129 (2020).10.1021/acs.chemrev.0c00004 ↗

92. Denysenko, D. et al. Elucidating gating effects for hydrogen sorption in MFU-4-type triazolate-based metal-organic frameworks featuring different pore sizes. Chem. A Eur. J. 17, 1837–1848 (2011).10.1002/chem.201001872 ↗

93. Bucior, B. J. et al. Identification schemes for metal–organic frameworks to enable rapid search and cheminformatics analysis. Cryst. Growth Des. 19, 6682–6697 (2019).10.1021/acs.cgd.9b01050 ↗

94. Vandenhaute, S., Cools-Ceuppens, M., DeKeyser, S., Verstraelen, T. & Van Speybroeck, V. Machine learning potentials for metal–organic frameworks using an incremental learning approach. NPJ Comput. Mater. 9, 19 (2023).10.1038/s41524-023-00969-x ↗

95. Friederich, P., Häse, F., Proppe, J. & Aspuru-Guzik, A. Machine-learned potentials for next-generation matter simulations. Nat. Mater. 20, 750–761 (2021).10.1038/s41563-020-0777-6 ↗

96. Unke, O. T. et al. Machine learning force fields. Chem. Rev. 121, 10142–10186 (2021).10.1021/acs.chemrev.0c01111 ↗

97. Zheng, Z. et al. A GPT-4 reticular chemist for guiding MOF discovery. Angew. Chem. Int. Ed. 62, e20231 (2023). This study harnessed the capability of large language models like GPT-4 to guide the synthesis and discovery of MOFs.10.1002/anie.202311983 ↗

98. Park, H., Kang, Y., Choe, W. & Kim, J. Mining insights on metal–organic framework synthesis from scientific literature texts. J. Chem. Inf. Model. 62, 1190–1198 (2022).10.1021/acs.jcim.1c01297 ↗

99. Glasby, L. T. et al. DigiMOF: a database of metal–organic framework synthesis information generated via text mining. Chem. Mater. 35, 4510–4524 (2023).10.1021/acs.chemmater.3c00788 ↗

100. Nazarian, D., Camp, J. S. & Sholl, D. S. A comprehensive set of high-quality point charges for simulations of metal-organic frameworks. Chem. Mater. 28, 785–793 (2016).10.1021/acs.chemmater.5b03836 ↗