Evidence map›Paper›PMID 41128259›Full record

ArticleAdvanced materials (Deerfield Beach, Fla.)2026

Learning Crystallographic Disorder: Bridging Prediction and Experiment in Materials Discovery.

Konstantin S Jakob, Aron Walsh, Karsten Reuter, Johannes T Margraf

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Advanced materials (Deerfield Beach, Fla.), 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
4citing 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

4 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Review
  2. Review
  3. Generative Models for Crystalline Materials.Advanced materials (Deerfield Beach, Fla.) · 2026
    Review
  4. Article
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

4 authors.

Konstantin S JakobTheory Department, Fritz Haber Institute of the Max Planck Society, Faradayweg 4-6, 14195, Berlin, Germany.ORCID https://orcid.org/0009-0002-8173-5596
Aron WalshDepartment of Materials, Imperial College London, London, SW7 2AZ, UK.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0001-5460-7033
Karsten ReuterTheory Department, Fritz Haber Institute of the Max Planck Society, Faradayweg 4-6, 14195, Berlin, Germany.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0001-8473-8659
Johannes T MargrafTheory Department, Fritz Haber Institute of the Max Planck Society, Faradayweg 4-6, 14195, Berlin, Germany.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-0862-5289

Funding

Thomas Young Centre
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Recent computational materials discovery efforts have led to an enormous number of predictions of previously unknown, potentially stable inorganic, crystalline compounds. In particular, both high-throughput screenings and generative models have benefited tremendously from recent advances in computational resources and available data. However, these efforts are currently limited to predicting pristine crystalline materials. As a consequence, many of these predictions cannot be realized in experiments, where kinetic effects, defects, and crystallographic disorder can be crucial. To address this shortcoming, the current work aims to introduce disorder into computational materials discovery with machine learning (ML) based classification models. Trained on the inorganic crystal structure database (ICSD), these classifiers capture the chemical trends of crystallographic disorder and estimate the prevalence of disorder in computational databases produced by the Materials Project or Graph Networks for Materials Science (GNoME) initiatives. This opens the door toward disorder-aware computational materials discovery workflows, bridging the gap between prediction and experiment.

Indexed as

disorderICSDmachine learningmaterials discovery

Identifiers

PMID41128259
PMCPMC12822528

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.