ArticleACS omega2026
A Comparative Study of Structural Representations for 2D Materials: Insights from Dynamic Collision Fingerprint and Matminer Library.
Article in ACS omega, 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
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
In materials science, the choice of structural descriptors for machine learning protocols strongly influences both predictive performance and model interpretability. High-dimensional descriptors can improve numerical accuracy, but often introduce substantial computational overhead and reduce transparency. To address this, the Dynamic Collision Fingerprint (DCF) framework generates concise descriptors via the dynamical probing of atomic structures. In this work, we benchmark DCF against the widely used Matminer library using a data set of 120 two-dimensional (2D) carbon allotropes. We evaluate performance across three regression algorithms, linear regression, decision trees, and XGBoost, utilizing train-test partitions from 10% to 90%. Our results demonstrate that DCF matches the predictive accuracy of Matminer across all algorithms. Although Matminer can be faster in terms of execution time, DCF accomplishes its predictive performance using descriptors that are significantly lower-dimensional, pointing to manageable computing costs in feature space. Moreover, compared to the rather technical Matminer descriptions, DCF exhibits considerably clearer physical interpretability. These findings suggest that DCF serves as a viable alternative to high-dimensional descriptor libraries for structural representation, since it remains both computationally flexible and physically grounded.
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.