Evidence map›Paper›PMID 38893775›Full record

ReviewMaterials (Basel, Switzerland)2024

Merits and Demerits of Machine Learning of Ferroelectric, Flexoelectric, and Electrolytic Properties of Ceramic Materials.

Kyuichi Yasui

Abstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Materials (Basel, Switzerland), 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
3citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

3 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Possibility of Superconductivity ofMaterials (Basel, Switzerland) · 2025
    Article
  2. Review
  3. Review
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

1 author.

Kyuichi YasuiNational Institute of Advanced Industrial Science and Technology (AIST), Nagoya 463-8560, Japan.ORCID 0000-0002-0654-6675

Funding

Japan Science and Technology Agency (JST) JPMJGX23SC
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

In the present review, the merits and demerits of machine learning (ML) in materials science are discussed, compared with first principles calculations (PDE (partial differential equations) model) and physical or phenomenological ODE (ordinary differential equations) model calculations. ML is basically a fitting procedure of pre-existing (experimental) data as a function of various factors called descriptors. If excellent descriptors can be selected and the training data contain negligible error, the predictive power of a ML model is relatively high. However, it is currently very difficult for a ML model to predict experimental results beyond the parameter space of the training experimental data. For example, it is pointed out that all-dislocation-ceramics, which could be a new type of solid electrolyte filled with appropriate dislocations for high ionic conductivity without dendrite formation, could not be predicted by ML. The merits and demerits of first principles calculations and physical or phenomenological ODE model calculations are also discussed with some examples of the flexoelectric effect, dielectric constant, and ionic conductivity in solid electrolytes.

Indexed as

all-dislocation-ceramicsbeyond the parameter space of training datacomputational costexperimental datafirst principles calculationsinterpretabilitymachine learningPDE (partial differential equations) modelphysical or phenomenological ODE (ordinary differential equations) modelpredictive power

Identifiers

PMID38893775
PMCPMC11172741

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.