A review of the recent progress in battery informatics
Source abstract
Abstract
Abstract Batteries are of paramount importance for the energy storage, consumption, and transportation in the current and future society. Recently machine learning (ML) has demonstrated success for improving lithium-ion technologies and beyond. This in-depth review aims to provide state-of-art achievements in the interdisciplinary field of ML and battery research and engineering, the battery informatics. We highlight a crucial hurdle in battery informatics, the availability of battery data, and explain the mitigation of the data scarcity challenge with a detailed review of recent achievements. This review is concluded with a perspective in this new but exciting field.
Source: crossref · Quality: baseline
Research context
OpenAlex topics: Advanced Battery Technologies Research · Big Data and Digital Economy · Machine Learning in Materials Science
SciVX discovery tags are terminology-based. OpenAlex topics are source-provided classifications.
References (100+)
Show source-provided references
1. Historical carbon dioxide emissions from global fossil fuel combustion and industrial processes from 1758 to 2020. https://www.statista.com/statistics/264699/worldwide-co2-emissions/.
2. Choudhary, A. & Prasad, E. Lithium-ion Battery Market. https://www.alliedmarketresearch.com/lithium-ion-battery-market.
3. Agrawal, A. & Choudhary, A. Materials informatics and big data: realization of the “fourth paradigm” of science in materials science. APL Mater. 4, 053208 (2016).10.1063/1.4946894 ↗
4. Butler, K. T., Davies, D. W., Cartwright, H., Isayev, O. & Walsh, A. Machine learning for molecular and materials science. Nature 559, 547–555 (2018).10.1038/s41586-018-0337-2 ↗
5. Schmidt, J., Marques, M. R. G., Botti, S. & Marques, M. A. Recent advances and applications of machine learning in solid-state materials science. npj Comput. Mater. 5, 83 (2019).10.1038/s41524-019-0221-0 ↗
6. Wang, A. Y.-T. et al. Machine learning for materials scientists: an introductory guide toward best practices. Chem. Mater. 32, 4954–4965 (2020).10.1021/acs.chemmater.0c01907 ↗
7. Isayev, O. et al. Universal fragment descriptors for predicting properties of inorganic crystals. Nat. Commun. 8, 15679 (2017).10.1038/ncomms15679 ↗
8. Coley, C. W. et al. A graph-convolutional neural network model for the prediction of chemical reactivity. Chem. Sci. 10, 370–377 (2019).10.1039/C8SC04228D ↗
9. Chen, C., Ye, W., Zuo, Y., Zheng, C. & Ong, S. P. Graph networks as a universal machine learning framework for molecules and crystals. Chem. Mater. 31, 3564–3572 (2019).10.1021/acs.chemmater.9b01294 ↗
10. Behler, J. & Parrinello, M. Generalized neural network representation of highdimensional potential-energy surfaces. Phys. Rev. Lett. 98, 146401 (2007).10.1103/PhysRevLett.98.146401 ↗
11. Vandermause, J. et al. On-the-fly active learning of interpretable Bayesian force fields for atomistic rare events. npj Comput. Mater. 6, 20 (2020).10.1038/s41524-020-0283-z ↗
12. Mailoa, J. P. et al. A fast neural network approach for direct covariant forces prediction in complex multi-element extended systems. Nat. Mach. Intell. 1, 471–479 (2019).10.1038/s42256-019-0098-0 ↗
13. Ulissi, Z. W., Medford, A. J., Bligaard, T. & Nørskov, J. K. To address surface reaction network complexity using scaling relations machine learning and DFT calculations. Nat. Commun. 8, 14621 (2016).10.1038/ncomms14621 ↗
14. Aykol, M. et al. Network analysis of synthesizable materials discovery. Nat. Commun. 10, 2018 (2019).10.1038/s41467-019-10030-5 ↗
15. Granda, J. M., Donina, L., Dragone, V., Long, D.-L. & Cronin, L. Controlling an organic synthesis robot with machine learning to search for new reactivity. Nature 559, 377–381 (2018).10.1038/s41586-018-0307-8 ↗
16. Raccuglia, P. et al. Machine-learning-assisted materials discovery using failed experiments. Nature 553, 73–77 (2016).10.1038/nature17439 ↗
17. Xue, D. et al. Accelerated search for materials with targeted properties by adaptive design. Nat. Commun. 7, 5447 (2016).10.1038/ncomms11241 ↗
18. Balachandran, P. V., Kowalski, B., Sehirlioglu, A. & Lookman, T. Experimental search for high-temperature ferroelectric perovskites guided by two-step machine learning. Nat. Commun. 9, 1668 (2018).10.1038/s41467-018-03821-9 ↗
19. Carrete, J., Li, W., Mingo, N., Wang, S. & Curtarolo, S. Finding unprecedentedly low-thermal-conductivity half-Heusler semiconductors via high-throughput materials modeling. Phys. Rev. X 4, 011019 (2014).
20. Kim, C., Pilania, G. & Ramprasad, R. Machine learning assisted predictions of intrinsic dielectric breakdown strength of ABX3 perovskites. J. Phys. Chem. C 120, 14575–14580 (2016).10.1021/acs.jpcc.6b05068 ↗
21. Seko, A., Hayashi, H., Nakayama, K., Takahashi, A. & Tanaka, I. Representation of compounds for machine-learning prediction of physical properties. Phys. Rev. B 95, 144110 (2017).10.1103/PhysRevB.95.144110 ↗
22. Chen, C. et al. A critical review of machine learning of energy materials. Adv. Energy Mater. 10, 1903242 (2020).10.1002/aenm.201903242 ↗
23. Tran, K. & Ulissi, Z. W. Active learning across intermetallics to guide discovery of electrocatalysts for CO2 reduction and H2 evolution. Nat. Catal. 1, 696–703 (2018).10.1038/s41929-018-0142-1 ↗
24. Rickman, J. M. et al. Materials informatics for the screening of multi-principal elements and high-entropy alloys. Nat. Commun. 10, 2618 (2019).10.1038/s41467-019-10533-1 ↗
25. Zhang, Y. et al. Unsupervised discovery of solid-state lithium ion conductors. Nat. Commun. 10, 5260 (2019).10.1038/s41467-019-13214-1 ↗
26. Tshitoyan, V. et al. Unsupervised word embeddings capture latent knowledge from materials science literature. Nature 571, 95–98 (2019).10.1038/s41586-019-1335-8 ↗
27. Liu, Y., Guo, B., Zou, X., Li, Y. & Shi, S. Machine learning assisted materials design and discovery for rechargeable batteries. Energy Storage Mater. 31, 434–450 (2020).10.1016/j.ensm.2020.06.033 ↗
28. Guo, H., Wang, Q., Stuke, A., Urban, A. & Artrith, N. Accelerated atomistic modeling of solid-state battery materials with machine learning. Front. Energy Res. 9, 695902 (2021).10.3389/fenrg.2021.695902 ↗
29. Liu, H., Ma, S., Wu, J., Wang, J. & Wang, X. Recent advances in screening lithium solid-state electrolytes through machine learning. Front. Energy Res. 9, 639741 (2021).10.3389/fenrg.2021.639741 ↗
30. Deng, L. The MNIST database of handwritten digit images for machine learning research. IEEE Signal Proc. Mag. 29, 141–142 (2012).10.1109/MSP.2012.2211477 ↗
31. Barker, J., Watanabe, S., Vincent, E. & Trmal, J. The fifth ‘CHiME’ Speech Separation and Recognition Challenge: Dataset, task and baselines, In Interspeech 2018 (Hyderabad, India, 2018).10.21437/Interspeech.2018-1768 ↗
32. Jain, A. et al. The Materials Project: A materials genome approach to accelerating materials innovation. APL Mater. 1, 011002 (2013).10.1063/1.4812323 ↗
33. Kirklin, S. et al. The Open Quantum Materials Database (OQMD): assessing the accuracy of DFT formation energies. npj Comput. Mater. 1, 15010 (2015).10.1038/npjcompumats.2015.10 ↗
34. Saal, J. E., Kirklin, S., Aykol, M., Meredig, B. & Wolverton, C. Materials design and discovery with high-throughput density functional theory: The Open Quantum Materials Database (OQMD). JOM 65, 1501–1509 (2013).10.1007/s11837-013-0755-4 ↗
35. Curtarolo, S. et al. AFLOWLIB.ORG: a distributed materials properties repository from high-throughput ab initio calculations. Comput. Mater. Sci. 58, 227–235 (2012).10.1016/j.commatsci.2012.02.002 ↗
36. Ortiz, C., Eriksson, O. & Klintenberg, M. Data mining and accelerated electronic structure theory as a tool in the search for new functional materials. Comput. Mater. Sci. 44, 1042–1049 (2009).10.1016/j.commatsci.2008.07.016 ↗
37. Landis, D. D. et al. The computational materials repository. Comput. Sci. Eng. 14, 51–57 (2012).10.1109/MCSE.2012.16 ↗
38. Draxl, C. & Scheffler, M. NOMAD: The FAIR concept for big data-driven materials science. MRS Bull. 43, 676–682 (2018).10.1557/mrs.2018.208 ↗
39. Meredig, B. et al. Combinatorial screening for new materials in unconstrained composition space with machine learning. Phys. Rev. B 89, 094104 (2014).10.1103/PhysRevB.89.094104 ↗
40. Ye, W., Chen, C., Wang, Z., Chu, I.-H. & Ong, S. P. Deep neural networks for accurate predictions of crystal stability. Nat. Commun. 9, 3800 (2018).10.1038/s41467-018-06322-x ↗
41. Zeng, S. et al. Atom table convolutional neural networks for an accurate prediction of compounds properties. npj Comput. Mater. 5, 84 (2019).10.1038/s41524-019-0223-y ↗
42. Bartel, C. J. et al. A critical examination of compound stability predictions from machine-learned formation energies. Npj Comput. Mater. 6, 97 (2020).10.1038/s41524-020-00362-y ↗
43. Goodall, R. E. A. & Lee, A. A. Predicting materials properties without crystal structure: deep representation learning from stoichiometry. Nat. Commun. 11, 6280 (2020).10.1038/s41467-020-19964-7 ↗
44. Huang, L. & Ling, C. Practicing deep learning in materials science: an evaluation for predicting the formation energies. J. Appl. Phys. 128, 124901 (2020).10.1063/5.0012411 ↗
45. Jha, D. et al. ElemNet: deep learning the chemistry of materials from only elemental composition. Sci. Rep. 8, 17593 (2018).10.1038/s41598-018-35934-y ↗
46. Ceder, G., Hautier, G., Jain, A. & Ong, S. P. Recharging lithium battery research with first-principles methods. MRS Bull. 36, 185–191 (2011).10.1557/mrs.2011.31 ↗
47. Jain, A., Hautier, G., Ong, S. P., Dacek, S. & Ceder, G. Relating voltage and thermal safety in Li-ion battery cathodes: a high-throughput computational stu. Phys. Chem. Chem. Physc. 17, 5942–5953 (2015).10.1039/C5CP00250H ↗
48. Nolan, A., Zhu, Y., he, X., Bai, Q. & Mo, Y. Computation-accelerated design of materials and interfaces for all-solid-state lithium-ion batteries. Joule 2, 2016–2046 (2018).10.1016/j.joule.2018.08.017 ↗
49. Aykol, M. et al. High-throughput computational design of cathode coatings for Li-ion batteries. Nat. Commun. 7, 13779 (2016).10.1038/ncomms13779 ↗
50. Xiao, Y., Miara, L. J., Wang, Y. & Ceder, G. Computational screening of cathode coatings for solid-state batteries. Joule 3, 1252–1275 (2019).10.1016/j.joule.2019.02.006 ↗
51. Henkelman, G. & Jónsson, H. A climbing image nudged elastic band method for finding saddle points and minimum energy paths. J. Chem. Phys. 113, 9901–9904 (2000).10.1063/1.1329672 ↗
52. Ceder, G., Ong, S. P. & Wang, Y. Predictive modeling and design rules for solid electrolytes. MRS Bull. 43, 746–751 (2018).10.1557/mrs.2018.210 ↗
53. Deng, Z., Zhu, Z., Chu, I.-H. & Ong, S. P. Data-driven first-principles methods for the study and design of alkali superionic conductors. Chem. Mater. 29, 281–288 (2017).10.1021/acs.chemmater.6b02648 ↗
54. Bergerhoff, G., Hundt, R., Sievers, R. & Brown, I. D. The inorganic crystal structure database. J. CHem. Inf. Comput. Sci. 23, 66–69 (1983).10.1021/ci00038a003 ↗
55. Gražulis, S. et al. Crystallography Open Database (COD): an open-access collection of crystal structures and platform for world-wide collaboration. Nucleic Acids Res. 40, D420–D427 (2011).10.1093/nar/gkr900 ↗
56. Villars, P., Cenzual, K., Gladyshevskii, R. & Iwata, S. Pauling file—towards a holistic view. Chem. Met. Alloy. 11, 43–76 (2018).10.30970/cma11.0382 ↗
57. Saha, B. & Goebel, K. A.P.D.R. http://ti.arc.nasa.gov/project/prognostic-data-repository (2007).
58. Bole, B., Kulkarni, C. & Daigle, M. Adaptation of an electrochemistry-based Li-ion battery model to account for deterioration observed under randomized use, in: F In: Proc. Annual Conference of the Prognostics and Health Management Society, Fort Worth, TX, USA, 29, (2014).
59. Hogge, E. F., Bole, B. M., Vazquez, S. L. & Celaya, J. Verification of a remaining flying time prediction system for small electric aircraft, In: Proc. Annual Conference of the Prognostics and Health Management Society (2015).
60. Barkholtz, H. M., Fresquez, A., Chalamala, B. R. & Ferreira, S. R. A database for comparative electrochemical performance of commercial 18650-format lithium-ion cells. J. Electrochem. Soc. 164, A2697 (2017).10.1149/2.1701712jes ↗
61. Mennen, S. M. et al. The evolution of high-throughput experimentation in pharmaceutical development and perspectives on the future. Org. Process Res. Dev. 23, 1213–1242 (2019).10.1021/acs.oprd.9b00140 ↗
62. Shevlin, M. Practical high-throughput experimentation for chemists. ACS Med. Chem. Lett. 8, 601–607 (2017).10.1021/acsmedchemlett.7b00165 ↗
63. Hahn, R. et al. High-throughput battery materials testing based on test cell arrays and dispense/jet printed electrodes. Microsyst. Technol. 25, 1137–1149 (2019).10.1007/s00542-019-04368-5 ↗
64. Liu, P. et al. High throughput materials synthesis methods for lithium ion battery research. J. Materiomics 3, 202–208 (2017).10.1016/j.jmat.2017.07.004 ↗
65. Mcginn, P. J. Combinatorial electrochemistry—processing and characterization for materials discovery. Mater. Discov. 1, 38–53 (2015).10.1016/j.md.2015.10.002 ↗
66. McGinn, P. J. Thin-film processing routes for combinatorial materials investigations—a review. ACS Comb. Sci. 21, 501–515 (2019).10.1021/acscombsci.9b00032 ↗
67. Yanase, I., Ohtaki, T. & Watanabe, M. Application of combinatorial process to LiCo1−XMnXO2 (0≦X≦0.2) powder synthesis. Solid State Ion. 151, 189–196 (2002).10.1016/S0167-2738(02)00709-9 ↗
68. Fujimoto, K., Takada, K., Sasaki, T. & Watanabe, M. Combinatorial approach for powder preparation of pseudo-ternary system LiO0.5-X-TiO2 (X: FeO1.5, CrO1.5 and NiO). Appl. Surface Sci. 223, 49–53 (2004).10.1016/S0169-4332(03)00897-3 ↗
69. Brown, C. R., McCalla, E., Watson, C. & Dahn, J. R. Combinatorial study of the Li−Ni−Mn−Co oxide pseudoquaternary system for use in Li−ion battery materials research. ACS Comb. Sci. 17, 381–391 (2015).10.1021/acscombsci.5b00048 ↗
70. Carey, G. H. & Dahn, J. R. Combinatorial synthesis of mixed transition metal oxides for lithium-ion batteries. ACS Comb. Sci. 13, 186–189 (2011).10.1021/co1000597 ↗
71. McCalla, E., Rowe, A. W., Camardese, J. & Dahn, J. R. The role of metal site vacancies in promoting Li–Mn–Ni–O layered solid solutions. Chem. Mater. 25, 2716–2721 (2013).10.1021/cm401461m ↗
72. Adhikari, T. et al. Development of high-throughput methods for sodium-ion battery cathodes. ACS Comb. Sci. 22, 311–318 (2020).10.1021/acscombsci.9b00181 ↗
73. Su, L., Ferrandon, M., Kowalski, J. A., Vaughey, J. T. & Brushett, F. R. Electrolyte development for non-aqueous redox flow batteries using a high-throughput screening platform. J. Electrochem. Soc. 161, A1905–A1914 (2014).10.1149/2.0811412jes ↗
74. Beal, M. S. et al. High throughput methodology for synthesis, screening, and optimization of solid state lithium ion electrolytes. ACS Comb. Sci. 13, 375–381 (2010).10.1021/co100075f ↗
75. Yada, C. et al. A high-throughput approach developing lithium-niobium-tantalum oxides as electrolyte/cathode interlayers for high-voltage all-solid-state lithium batteries. J. Electrochem. Soc. 162, A722 (2015).10.1149/2.0661504jes ↗
76. Matsuda, S., Nishioka, K. & Nakanishi, S. High-throughput combinatorial screening of multi-component electrolyte additives to improve the performance of Li metal secondary batteries. Sci. Rep. 9, 6211 (2019).10.1038/s41598-019-42766-x ↗
77. Matsubara, M., Suzumura, A., Ohba, N. & Asahi, R. Identifying superionic conductors by materials informatics and high-throughput synthesis. Commun. Mater. 1, 5 (2020).10.1038/s43246-019-0004-7 ↗
78. Whitacre, J. F. et al. An autonomous electrochemical test stand for machine learning informed electrolyte optimization. J. Electrochem. Soc. 166, A4181–A4187 (2019).10.1149/2.0521916jes ↗
79. Dave, A., Gering, K. L., Mitchell, J. M., Whitacre, J. & Viswanathan, V. Benchmarking conductivity predictions of the advanced electrolyte model (AEM) for aqueous systems. J. Electrochem. Soc. 167, 013514 (2019).10.1149/2.0142001JES ↗
80. Dave, A. et al. Autonomous discovery of battery electrolytes with robotic experimentation and machine learning. Cell Rep. Phys. Sci. 1, 100264 (2020).10.1016/j.xcrp.2020.100264 ↗
81. Huang, L. & Ling, C. Representing multiword chemical terms through phrase-level preprocessing and word embedding. ACS Omega 4, 18510–18519 (2019).10.1021/acsomega.9b02060 ↗
82. Olivetti, E. et al. Data-driven materials research enabled by natural language processing. Appl. Phys. Rev. 7, 041317 (2020).10.1063/5.0021106 ↗
83. Kononova, O. et al. Opportunities and challenges of text mining in materials research. iScience 24, 102155 (2021).10.1016/j.isci.2021.102155 ↗
84. Kim, E. et al. Machine-learned and codified synthesis parameters of oxide materials. Sci. Data 4, 170127 (2017).10.1038/sdata.2017.127 ↗
85. Kim, E. et al. Materials synthesis insights from scientific literature via text extraction and machine learning. Chem. Mater. 29, 9436 (2017).10.1021/acs.chemmater.7b03500 ↗
86. He, T. et al. Similarity of precursors in solid-state synthesis as text-mined from scientific literature. Chem. Mater. 32, 17399–17404 (2020).10.1021/acs.chemmater.0c02553 ↗
87. Mahbub, R. et al. Text mining for processing conditions of solid-state battery electrolytes. Electrochem. Commun. 121, 106860 (2020).10.1016/j.elecom.2020.106860 ↗
88. Huang, S. & Cole, J. M. A database of battery materials auto-generated using ChemDataExtractor. Sci. Data 7, 260 (2020).10.1038/s41597-020-00602-2 ↗
89. Batra, R., Pilania, G., Uberuaga, B. P. & Ramprasad, R. Multifidelity information fusion with machine learning: a case study of dopant formation energies in Hafnia. ACS Appl. Mater. Interfaces 11, 24906–24918 (2019).10.1021/acsami.9b02174 ↗
90. Zhang, Y. & Ling, C. A strategy to apply machine learning to small datasets in materials science. Npj Comput. Mater. 4, 25 (2017).10.1038/s41524-018-0081-z ↗
91. Chen, C., Zuo, Y., Ye, W., Li, X. & Ong, S. P. Learning properties of ordered and disordered materials from multi-fidelity data. Nat. Comput. Sci. 1, 46–53 (2021).10.1038/s43588-020-00002-x ↗
92. Fujimura, K. et al. Accelerated materials design of lithium superionic conductors based on first-principles calculations and machine learning algorithms. Adv. Energy Mater. 3, 980 (2013).10.1002/aenm.201300060 ↗
93. Bachman, J. C. et al. Inorganic solid-state electrolytes for lithium batteries: mechanisms and properties governing ion conduction. Chem. Rev. 116, 140–162 (2016).10.1021/acs.chemrev.5b00563 ↗
94. Thangadurai, V., Narayanan, S. & Pinzaru, D. Garnet-type solid-state fast Li ion conductors for Li batteries: critical review. Chem. Soc. Rev. 43, 4714–4727 (2014).10.1039/c4cs00020j ↗
95. Kim, E., Huang, K., Kononova, O., Ceder, G. & Olivetti, E. Distilling a materials synthesis ontology. Matter 1, 8–12 (2019).10.1016/j.matt.2019.05.011 ↗
96. Raccuglia, P. et al. Machine-learning-assisted materials discovery using failed experiments. Nature 553, 73–77 (2016).10.1038/nature17439 ↗
97. Jia, X. et al. Anthropogenic biases in chemical reaction data hinder exploratory inorganic synthesis. Nature 573, 251–255 (2019).10.1038/s41586-019-1540-5 ↗
98. Artrith, N. et al. Best practices in machine learning for chemistry. Nat. Chem. 13, 505–508 (2021).10.1038/s41557-021-00716-z ↗
99. Wolpert, D. H. The lack of a priori distinctions between learning algorithms. Neural Comput. 8, 1341–1390 (1996).10.1162/neco.1996.8.7.1341 ↗
100. Sendek, A. D. et al. Holistic computational structure screening of more than 12,000 candidates for solid lithium-ion conductor materials. Energy Environ. Sci. 10, 306–320 (2017).10.1039/C6EE02697D ↗