Evidence map›Paper›PMID 42358694›Full record

ReviewJACS Au2026

Smarter Data: Rethinking Data Generation for Machine Learning Potentials in Heterogeneous Catalysis.

Wenbo Xie, Yixiao Han, Chenyu Wu, P Hu

Abstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in JACS Au, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.

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

0 citing papers in PubMed.

No citing paper in PubMed yet.

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.

Wenbo XieSchool of Physical Science and Technology, ShanghaiTech University, Shanghai 201210, China.
Yixiao HanSchool of Physical Science and Technology, ShanghaiTech University, Shanghai 201210, China.
Chenyu WuSchool of Physical Science and Technology, ShanghaiTech University, Shanghai 201210, China.
P HuSchool of Physical Science and Technology, ShanghaiTech University, Shanghai 201210, China.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-6318-1051

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Machine-learning potentials (MLPs) promise near-first-principles fidelity at scales relevant to heterogeneous catalysis, yet the key determinant of their reliability remains the quality of the training data. A paramount challenge lies in constructing training sets that capture both the system-specific structural domains and the broader chemical variability arising from the complex, dynamic nature of heterogeneous catalytic systems. In this perspective, we argue that the key question is no longer simply how to generate more data, but how to generate the right data. We reinterpret the main strategies used to construct MLP training sets for heterogeneous catalysis through the lens of scope, relevance, and coverage. We then examine the challenges of data generation in catalytic systems and how they have shaped prevailing structure-based sampling practices, which encode system relevance and targeted coverage directly into the data set. We also discuss emerging interaction-based sampling strategies that aim to broaden local-interaction support beyond narrowly predefined systems. We conclude by consolidating a possible hybrid data generation workflow that combines the strengths of both approaches, thereby bringing MLPs closer to the simulation of complex heterogeneous catalytic systems.

Indexed as

heterogeneous catalysisinteraction-based samplingmachine-learning potentials (MLPs)structure-based samplingtraining data generation

Identifiers

PMID42358694
PMCPMC13291977

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC-ND
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.