journal article·2026-03Open access

High-Precision Classification of Transparent Conductive Oxides with Optical Signatures using XGBoost Algorithm for Accelerated Material Screening

Norhazwani Md Yunos, Camellia Doroody, Ong Ke Sheng, Hasrul Nisham Rosly, Chenyoushi Xu, Zheng-Jie Feng, Zuraini Othman, Yuan Dong

Journal of Electronic Materials· Volume 55· Issue 3

Abstract

Abstract This study introduces a machine learning (ML) adaptive interface for classifying transparent conductive oxide (TCO) materials by examining their optical characteristics, such as their wavelength, optical density, absorption, and transmission. Six supervised ML models were considered in this study, namely decision tree, random forest, extreme gradient boosting (XGBoost), support vector classifier (SVC), K -nearest neighbors (KNN), and multilayer perceptron (MLP). These models were evaluated using metrics such as accuracy, precision, recall, F1-score, confusion matrices, receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curves, and learning curves. The comparison findings revealed that XGBoost delivered the best performance, achieving an accuracy of $$96.21\%$$ and a perfect area under the curve (AUC) score of 1.00, effectively distinguishing all five sampled TCO classes: aluminum-doped zinc oxide (AZO), fluorine-doped tin oxide (FTO), indium tin oxide (ITO), magnesium-doped zinc oxide (MZO), and zinc oxide (ZnO). These findings reveal ML’s potential for both scientific and industrial integration in material science research. XGBoost, as a high-precision model, may significantly reduce process time and equipment-intensive laboratory characterizations by allowing for the rapid and precise classification of data from optical measurements. This expedites the search for materials suitable for use in photovoltaics, optoelectronics, and display technologies, all of which require high transparency and conductivity. Overall, this work expands the potential for using ML to categorize materials, particularly XGBoost. It provides both scientific understanding and practical applications in innovative substance informatics and industrial quality control.
Source: crossref · Quality: candidate unverified · Source record ↗

Research context

OpenAlex topics: ZnO doping and properties · Nanomaterials and Printing Technologies · Biosensors and Analytical Detection

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

References (45)

Show source-provided references
1. J. Shi, J. Zhang, K.H.L. Zhang, L. Yang, D. Qi, and M. Qu, Wide bandgap oxide semiconductors: from materials physics to optoelectronic devices. Adv. Mater. 33(50), 2006230 (2021).10.1002/adma.202006230 ↗
2. M. Grundmann, H. Frenzel, M. Lorenz, A. Lajn, F. Schein, and H. Von Wenckstern, Transparent semiconducting oxides: materials and devices. Phys. Status Solidi (a). 207(6), 1437–1449 (2010).10.1002/pssa.200983771 ↗
3. A. Stadler, Transparent conducting oxides-an up-to-date overview. Materials 5(4), 661–683 (2012).10.3390/ma5040661 ↗
4. A. Schoonderbeek, Laser processing of thin films for photovoltaic applications. J. Laser Micro/Nanoeng. 5(3), 248–255 (2010).10.2961/jlmn.2010.03.0013 ↗
5. D. Grandi, C. Mccomb, Y.P. Jain, B. Cramer, and A. Groom, Evaluating large language models for material selection. J. Comput. Inf. Sci. Eng. 25(2), 1–33 (2024).
6. C.A. Rickert, O. Lieleg, E.N. Hayta, D.M. Selle, I. Kouroudis, A. Gagliardi, and M. Harth, Machine learning approach to analyze the surface properties of biological materials. ACS Biomater. Sci. Eng. 7(9), 4614–4625 (2021).10.1021/acsbiomaterials.1c00869 ↗
7. M.L. Bødker, M. Bauchy, T. Du, J.C. Mauro, and M.M. Smedskjaer, Predicting glass structure by physics-informed machine learning. Npj Comput. Mater. 8(1), 192 (2022).10.1038/s41524-022-00882-9 ↗
8. N. Amigo, F.J. Valencia, and S. Palominos, Machine learning modeling for the prediction of plastic properties in metallic glasses. Sci. Rep. 13(1), 348 (2023).10.1038/s41598-023-27644-x ↗
9. D.A. Cristaldi, S. Millesi, I. Crupi, F. Priolo, G. Impellizzeri, R.M.J. Jacobs, R.G. Egdell, and A. Gulino, Structural, electronic, and electrical properties of an undoped n-type cdo thin film with high electron concentration. J. Phys. Chem. C 118(27), 15019–15026 (2014).10.1021/jp5040085 ↗
10. H. Wen, M. Zhang, X. Liu, H. Huang, B. Wang, Y. Wang, W. Xiao, and B. Weng, Advancements in transparent conductive oxides for photoelectrochemical applications. Nanomaterials 14(7), 591 (2024).10.3390/nano14070591 ↗
11. S. Boscarino, I. Crupi, F. Simone, S. Mirabella, and A. Terrasi, TCO/Ag/TCO transparent electrodes for solar cells application. Appl. Phys. A 116(3), 1287–1291 (2014).10.1007/s00339-014-8222-9 ↗
12. R.A. Afre, N. Sharma, M. Sharon, and M. Sharon, Transparent conducting oxide films for various applications: A review. Rev. Adv. Mater. Sci. 53(1), 79–89 (2018).10.1515/rams-2018-0006 ↗
13. T.J. Coutts, X. Li, and D.L. Young, Characterization of transparent conducting oxides. MRS Bull. 25(8), 58–65 (2000).10.1557/mrs2000.152 ↗
14. H. Dondapati, K. Santiago, and A.K. Pradhan, Influence of growth temperature on electrical, optical, and plasmonic properties of aluminium: zinc oxide films grown by radio frequency magnetron sputtering. J. Appl. Phys. 114, 143506 (2013).10.1063/1.4824751 ↗
15. E. Salomatina, P. Shelud’ko, V. Kuz’michev, and L. Smirnova, Photocatalytic decomposition of azo dyes and phenols using polymer composites containing nanostructured poly (titanium oxide) doped with gold or silver nanoparticles under light irradiation in a wide wavelength range. Catalysts 13(2), 423 (2023).10.3390/catal13020423 ↗
16. A. Stoll, and P. Benner, Machine learning for material characterization with an application for predicting mechanical properties. GAMM-Mitt. 44(1), e202100003 (2021).10.1002/gamm.202100003 ↗
17. O. Al-Saban, S.O. Abdellatif, Optoelectronic materials informatics: Utilizing random-forest machine learning in optimizing the harvesting capabilities of mesostructured-based solar cells. In: 2021 International Telecommunications Conference. 4, 1–4, (2021)10.1109/ITC-Egypt52936.2021.9513898 ↗
18. M. Lee, Insights from machine learning techniques for predicting the efficiency of fullerene derivatives-based ternary organic solar cells at ternary blend design. Adv. Energy Mater. 9(26), 1900891 (2019).10.1002/aenm.201900891 ↗
19. Y. Li, Q. Lyu, Y. Wu, Y. Han, L. Shen, X. Zhang, and H. Wu, Local environment interaction-based machine learning framework for predicting molecular adsorption energy. J. Mater. Inform. 4, 4 (2024).
20. H.A. Salman, A. Kalakech, and A. Steiti, Random forest algorithm overview. Babylon. J. Mach. Learn. 2024, 69–79 (2024).10.58496/BJML/2024/007 ↗
21. C. Zhao, Y. Yuan, R. Peng, J. Huang, Z. Shi, D. Wu, and H.-T. Zhang, BoostTree and BoostForest for ensemble learning. IEEE Trans. Pattern Anal. Mach. Intell. 45(7), 1–17 (2022).
22. E. Bisong, The multilayer perceptron (MLP), Building machine learning and deep learning models on google cloud platform. ed. E. Bisong (Berkeley, CA: Apress, 2019), pp. 401–405.10.1007/978-1-4842-4470-8_31 ↗
23. E. Ozturk Kiyak, B. Ghasemkhani, and D. Birant, High-level K-nearest neighbors (HLKNN): A supervised machine learning model for classification analysis. Electronics 12(18), 3828 (2023).10.3390/electronics12183828 ↗
24. D. Boldini, F. Grisoni, D. Kuhn, L. Friedrich, and S.A. Sieber, Practical guidelines for the use of gradient boosting for molecular property prediction. J. Cheminform. 15(1), 73 (2023).10.1186/s13321-023-00743-7 ↗
25. J. Wu, Y. Li, and Y. Ma, Comparison of XGBoost and the Neural Network model on the class-balanced datasets. In: 2021 IEEE 3rd International Conference on Frontiers Technology of Information and Computer (ICFTIC). 457–461, (2021)10.1109/ICFTIC54370.2021.9647373 ↗
26. E.Y. Boateng, J. Otoo, and D.A. Abaye, Basic tenets of classification algorithms K-nearest-neighbor, support vector machine, random forest and neural network: A review. J. Data Analy. Inform. Process. 08(04), 341–357 (2020).
27. E. Halabaku, and E. Bytyçi, Overfitting in machine learning: A comparative analysis of decision trees and random forests. Intell. Autom. Soft Comput. 39(6), 987–1006 (2024).10.32604/iasc.2024.059429 ↗
28. X. Huang, W. Ruan, and G. Jin, Decision tree, Machine learning safety, artificial intelligence: Foundations, theory, and algorithms. ed. X. Huang, G. Jin, and W. Ruan (Singapore: Springer, 2012), pp. 49–70.
29. A.B. Shaik, S. Srinivasan, A brief survey on random forest ensembles in classification model. In: International Conference on Innovative Computing and Communications, Lecture Notes in Networks and System, 56, ed. by S. Bhattacharyya, A.E. Hassanien, D. Gupta, A Khanna, and I. Pan (Springer, Singapore, 2018) 253–26010.1007/978-981-13-2354-6_27 ↗
30. S. R, S.S. Ayachit, V. Patil, A. Singh, Competitive analysis of the top gradient boosting machine learning algorithms. In: 2020 2nd International Conference on Advances in Computing, Communication Control and Networking (ICACCCN), 191–196, (2020)10.1109/ICACCCN51052.2020.9362840 ↗
31. C. Bentéjac, G. Martínez-Muñoz, and A. Csörgő, A comparative analysis of gradient boosting algorithms. Artif. Intell. Rev. 54(3), 1937–1967 (2020).10.1007/s10462-020-09896-5 ↗
32. K.-L. Du, J. Hua, M.N.S. Swamy, J. Lu, and B. Jiang, Exploring kernel machines and support vector machines: principles, techniques, and future directions. Mathematics 12(24), 3935 (2024).10.3390/math12243935 ↗
33. S.V.S. Prasad, V.M. Krishna, and T.S. Savithiri, Performance evaluation of svm kernels on multispectral liss iii data for object classification. Int. J. Smart Sens. Intell. Syst. 10(4), 1–16 (2017).
34. D. Ortiz-Villaseñor, L.D. Medina-Madrazo, M.J. Castro-Toscano, O. Real-Moreno, G. Trujillo-Hernández, and D. Barrera-Román, K-nearest neighbors regression and applications. In: Exploring Psychology, Social Innovation and Advanced Applications of Machine Learning, ed. by M.E. Raygoza-L, J.H. Orduno-Osuna, A. Mercado-Herrera, R. Jimenez-Sanchez, and F.N. Murrieta-Rico (IGI Global Scientific Publishing, 2025) 295–31610.4018/979-8-3693-6910-4.ch015 ↗
35. J. Gou, Y. Kuang, and T. Xiong, A novel weighted voting for K-nearest neighbor rule. J. Comput. 6(5), 833 (2011).10.4304/jcp.6.5.833-840 ↗
36. P.P. Ippolito, Hyperparameter Tuning. In: Applied Data Science in Tourism, ed. by R. Egger (Springer, 2022) 231–251.10.1007/978-3-030-88389-8_12 ↗
37. C. Arnold, L. Biedebach, M. Neunhoeffer, and A. Küpfer, The role of hyperparameters in machine learning models and how to tune them. Polit. Sci. Res. Methods 12(4), 841–848 (2024).10.1017/psrm.2023.61 ↗
38. R. Muzayanah, M. Ali, D.A.A. Pertiwi, and M.A. Muslim, Comparison of GridSearchCV and bayesian hyperparameter optimization in random forest algorithm for diabetes prediction. J. Soft Comput. Explor. 5(1), 86–91 (2024).10.52465/joscex.v5i1.308 ↗
39. A.-C. Florea, and R. Andonie, Weighted random search for hyperparameter optimization. Int. J. Comput. Commun. Control 14(2), 154–169 (2019).10.15837/ijccc.2019.2.3514 ↗
40. Y. Ali, M. Al-Razgan, A. Maarouf, and E. Awwad, Hyperparameter search for machine learning algorithms for optimizing the computational complexity. Processes 11(2), 349 (2023).10.3390/pr11020349 ↗
41. O.Y. Bakhteev, and V.V. Strijov, Comprehensive analysis of gradient-based hyperparameter optimization algorithms. Ann. Oper. Res. 289(1), 51–65 (2019).10.1007/s10479-019-03286-z ↗
42. J. Obi, A comparative study of several classification metrics and their performances on data. World J. Adv. Eng. Technol. Sci. 8(1), 308–314 (2023).10.30574/wjaets.2023.8.1.0054 ↗
43. Y. Yang, Evaluating classification performance: Receiver operating characteristic and expected utility. Psychol. Methods 29(5), 827–843 (2024).10.1037/met0000515 ↗
44. M.R. Rezaei-Dastjerdehei, E. Fatemizadeh, A. Mijani, Addressing imbalance in multi-label classification using weighted cross entropy loss function. In: 2020 27th National and 5th International Iranian Conference on Biomedical Engineering (ICBME), 333–338, (2020)10.1109/ICBME51989.2020.9319440 ↗
45. B. Więckowska, K.B. Kubiak, P. Jóźwiak, W. Moryson, and B. Stawińska-Witoszyńska, Cohen’s Kappa coefficient as a measure to assess classification improvement following the addition of a new marker to a regression model. Int. J. Environ. Res. Public Health 19(16), 10213 (2022).10.3390/ijerph191610213 ↗