ReviewAdvanced materials (Deerfield Beach, Fla.)2026
Generative Models for Crystalline Materials.
Review 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. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
16 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Understanding structure-property relationships in materials is fundamental in condensed matter physics and materials science. Over the past few years, machine learning (ML) has emerged as a powerful tool for advancing this understanding and accelerating materials discovery. Early ML approaches primarily focused on constructing and screening large material spaces to identify promising candidates for various applications. More recently, research efforts have increasingly shifted toward generating crystal structures using end-to-end generative models. This review analyzes the current state of generative modeling for crystal structure prediction and de novo generation. It examines crystal representations, outlines the generative models used to design crystal structures, and evaluates their respective strengths and limitations. Furthermore, the review highlights experimental considerations for evaluating generated structures and provides recommendations for suitable existing software tools. Emerging topics, such as modeling disorder and defects, integration in advanced characterization, incorporating synthetic feasibility constraints, and model explainability are explored. Ultimately, this work aims to inform both experimental scientists looking to adapt suitable ML models to their specific circumstances and ML specialists seeking to understand the unique challenges related to inverse materials design and discovery.
Indexed as
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.