ArticleScientific reports2024
Predicting refractive index of inorganic compounds using machine learning.
Article in Scientific reports, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.
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.
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.
Who cites it
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- Embedding-driven physics informed neural network for predicting optical constants across materials.RSC advances · 2026Article
- Ensemble Machine Learning for the Prediction and Understanding of the Refractive Index in Chalcogenide Glasses.Molecules (Basel, Switzerland) · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
2 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Refractive index (RI) is one of the most important optical properties of materials. Due to the high importance of this physical parameter, there has always been a demand to find a method that provides the most optimal estimation. In this research, we utilize experimentally measured RI values of 272 inorganic compounds to build a machine learning model capable of predicting the RI of materials with low computational cost. Considering the significant relationship between the band gap and RI, we select this parameter as a predictor. In addition to the band gap, the atomic properties related to the building elements of the compounds form our data set in this work. To find the most optimal model and set of suitable predictors, we examine our data in four categories with 1, 5, 10, and 21 features. In addition, we compare the predicted RIs of 6 different independent regression methods, namely, ordinary least squares (OLSR), Gaussian process (GPR), support vector (SVR), random forest (RFR), gradient boosted trees (GBTR), and extremely randomized trees regression(ERTR). We notice that ERTR predicts RI with the highest accuracy compared to other regression methods. The prediction strength of our model excels in empirical relations and provides accurate results for a wide range of RIs. Thus, we demonstrate the high potential of machine learning methods for evaluating the RI, especially when it comes to providing an estimation of a desired physical quantity.
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.