An Easy, Simple, and Accessible Web-based Machine Learning Platform, SimPL-ML
Source abstract
Abstract
Most machine learning (ML) platforms used in materials science provide prediction models built using a computational database. However, to provide more practical and accurate material property predictions, it is advantageous to build a prediction model with user’s own data. Here, we present a web-based ML platform, SimPL-ML (https://www.simpl-ml.org) that enables the user to build an ML prediction model through a simple process using their own data. Our platform, SimPL-ML, comprises four main parts: a dataset editor for dataset preprocessing, a model generator to perform actual model training, a predictor to provide a predicted target value for an arbitrary input, and a band-gap predictor (as an example case study) to predict the band gap of inorganic materials through several optimized band gap prediction models. In addition to its core functions, SimPL-ML provides additional functions such as atomic feature generation and hyper-parameter optimization for efficient ML research. We expect our platform to facilitate more accurate and efficient materials research through ML.
Source: expertdata · Quality: candidate unverified · Source record ↗
Research context
OpenAlex topics: Machine Learning in Materials Science · X-ray Diffraction in Crystallography · Electronic and Structural Properties of Oxides
SciVX discovery tags are terminology-based. OpenAlex topics are source-provided classifications.
References (34)
Show source-provided references
1. Butler KT, Davies DW, Cartwright H, Isayev O, Walsh A (2018) Machine learning for molecular and materials science. Nature 559:547–55510.1038/s41586-018-0337-2 ↗
2. Xie T, Grossman JC (2018) Crystal graph convolutional neural networks for an accurate and interpretable prediction of material properties. Phys Rev Lett 120:14530110.1103/PhysRevLett.120.145301 ↗
3. Ward L, Agrawal A, Choudhary A, Wolverton C (2016) A general-purpose machine learning framework for predicting properties of inorganic materials. NPJ Comput Mater 2:20162810.1038/npjcompumats.2016.28 ↗
4. Cai J, Chu X, Xu K, Li H, Wei J (2020) Machine learning-driven new material discovery. Nanoscale Adv 2:3115–313010.1039/D0NA00388C ↗
5. Jha D, Choudhary K, Tavazza F, Liao W, Choudhary A, Campbell C, Agrawal A (2019) Enhancing materials property prediction by leveraging computational and experimental data using deep transfer learning. Nat Commun 10:531610.1038/s41467-019-13297-w ↗
6. Clement CL, Kauwe SK, Sparks TD (2020) Benchmark AFLOW data sets for machine learning. Integr Mater Manuf Innov 9:153–15610.1007/s40192-020-00174-4 ↗
7. Hansen K, Biegler F, Ramakrishnan R, Pronobis W, Lilienfeld OA, Müller KR, Tkatchenko A (2015) Machine learning predictions of molecular properties: accurate many-body potentials and nonlocality in chemical space. J Phys Chem Lett 6:2326–233110.1021/acs.jpclett.5b00831 ↗
8. Binder A, Bockmayr M, Hägele M, Wienert S, Heim D, Hellweg K, Ishii M, Stenzinger A, Hocke A, Denkert C, Müller KR, Klauschen F (2021) Morphological and molecular breast cancer profiling through explainable machine learning. Nat Mach Intell 3:355–36610.1038/s42256-021-00303-4 ↗
9. Heinen S, Rudorff GF, Lilienfeld OA (2021) Toward the design of chemical reactions: Machine learning barriers of competing mechanisms in reactant space. J Chem Phys 155:06410510.1063/5.0059742 ↗
10. Tkatchenko A (2020) Machine learning for chemical discovery. Nat Commun 11:412510.1038/s41467-020-17844-8 ↗
11. Deringer VL, Caro MA, Csányi G (2019) Machine learning interatomic potentials as emerging tools for materials science. Adv Mater 31:190276510.1002/adma.201902765 ↗
12. Na GS, Jang S, Chang H (2021) Predicting thermoelectric properties from chemical formula with explicitly identifying dopant effects. NPJ Comput Mater 7:10610.1038/s41524-021-00564-y ↗
13. Na GS, Jang S, Lee YL, Chang H (2020) Tuplewise material representation based machine learning for accurate band gap prediction. J Phys Chem A 124:10616–1062310.1021/acs.jpca.0c07802 ↗
14. Artrith N, Urban A, Ceder G (2017) Efficient and accurate machine-learning interpolation of atomic energies in compositions with many species. Phys Rev B 96:01411210.1103/PhysRevB.96.014112 ↗
15. Bartel CJ, Trewartha A, Wang Q, Dunn A, Jain A, Ceder G (2020) A critical examination of compound stability predictions from machine-learned formation energies. NPJ Comput Mater 6:9710.1038/s41524-020-00362-y ↗
16. Duan C, Liu F, Nandy A, Kulik HJ (2021) Putting density functional theory to the test in machine-learning-accelerated materials discovery. J Phys Chem Lett 12:4628–463710.1021/acs.jpclett.1c00631 ↗
17. Kim HW, Lee SW, Na GS, Han SJ, Kim SK, Shin JH, Chang H, Kim YT (2021) Reaction condition optimization for non-oxidative conversion of methane using artificial intelligence. React Chem Eng 6:235–24310.1039/D0RE00378F ↗
18. AFLOW-ML http://aflow.org/aflow-ml. Accessed Oct 2021
19. JARVIS ML https://jarvis.nist.gov/jarvisml. Accessed Oct 2021
20. Kresse G, Furthmuller J (1996) Efficient iterative schemes for ab initio total-energy calculations using a plane-wave basis set. Phys Rev B 54:11169–1118610.1103/PhysRevB.54.11169 ↗
21. Olson RS, Sipper M, Cava WL, Tartarone S, Vitale S, Fu W, Orzechowski P, Urbanowicz RJ, Holmes JH, Moore JH (2017) A system for accessible artificial intelligence. arXiv 1705:00594v210.1007/978-3-319-90512-9_8 ↗
22. Amazon SageMaker (2021) https://docs.aws.amazon.com/sagemaker/latest/dg/whatis.html. Accessed Dec 2021
23. Rapidminer Go (2021) https://rapidminer.com/why-rapidminer/. Accessed Dec 2021
24. Li Z, Chard R, Ward L, Chard K, Skluzacek TJ, Babuji Y, Woodard A, Tuecke S, Blaiszik B, Franklin MJ, Foster I (2021) DLHub: simplifying publication, discovery, and use of machine learning models in science. J Parallel Distrib Comput 147:64–7610.1016/j.jpdc.2020.08.006 ↗
25. Algorithmia (2021) https://algorithmia.com/. Accessed Dec 2021
26. Crankshaw D, Wang X, Zhou G, Franklin MJ, Gonzalez JE, Stoica I (2017) Clipper: a low-latency online prediction serving system. In: 14th USENIX symposium on networked systems design and implementation (NSDI), pp 613–627
27. Jang S SimPL-ML. https://simpl-ml.org. Accessed Oct 2021
28. Chen T, Guestrin C (2016) XGBoost: a scalable tree boosting system. In: Proceedings of the 22nd ACM SIGKDD international conference on knowledge discovery and data mining, pp 785–79410.1145/2939672.2939785 ↗
29. Gu T, Lu W, Bao X, Chen N (2006) Using support vector regression for the prediction of the band gap and melting point of binary and ternary compound semiconductors. Solid State Sci 8:129–13610.1016/j.solidstatesciences.2005.10.011 ↗
30. Friedman JH (2001) Greedy function approximation: a gradient boosting machine. Ann Stat 29:1189–123210.1214/aos/1013203451 ↗
31. Perdew JP, Burke K, Ernzerhof M (1996) Generalized gradient approximation made simple. Phys Rev Lett 77:386510.1103/PhysRevLett.77.3865 ↗
32. Morales-García Á, Valero R, Illas F (2017) An empirical, yet practical way to predict the band gap in solids by using density functional band structure calculations. J Phys Chem C 121:18862–1886610.1021/acs.jpcc.7b07421 ↗
33. Zhuo Y, Tehrani AM, Brgoch J (2018) Predicting the band gaps of inorganic solids by machine learning. J Phys Chem Lett 9:1668–167310.1021/acs.jpclett.8b00124 ↗
34. Kaggle https://www.kaggle.com/datasets. Accessed Oct 2021