# Are LLMs Ready for Real-World Materials Discovery?

Santiago Miret  N. M. Anoop Krishnan

###### Abstract

Large Language Models (LLMs) create exciting possibilities for powerful
language processing tools to accelerate research in materials science. While
LLMs have great potential to accelerate materials understanding and discovery,
they currently fall short in being practical materials science tools. In this
position paper, we show relevant failure cases of LLMs in materials science
that reveal current limitations of LLMs related to comprehending and reasoning
over complex, interconnected materials science knowledge. Given those
shortcomings, we outline a framework for developing Materials Science LLMs
(MatSci-LLMs) that are grounded in materials science knowledge and hypothesis
generation followed by hypothesis testing. The path to attaining performant
MatSci-LLMs rests in large part on building high-quality, multi-modal datasets
sourced from scientific literature where various information extraction
challenges persist. As such, we describe key materials science information
extraction challenges which need to be overcome in order to build large-scale,
multi-modal datasets that capture valuable materials science knowledge.
Finally, we outline a roadmap for applying future MatSci-LLMs for real-world
materials discovery via: 1. Automated Knowledge Base Generation; 2. Automated
In-Silico Material Design; and 3. MatSci-LLM Integrated Self-Driving Materials
Laboratories.

Machine Learning, Materials Science, LLMs

##  1 Introduction

Figure 1: Overview of MatSci-LLM requirements related to knowledge acquisition
and science acceleration. MatSci-LLMs require knowledge contained across
multiple documents along multiple data modalities. Pertinent materials science
knowledge includes understanding materials structure, properties and behavior
covering diverse conditions, as well as materials synthesis and analysis
procedures based on experimental descriptions. To effectively accelerate
science, MatSci-LLMs should interact with human scientists as robust question-
answering system and act as grounded hypothesis generators that augment a
scientist’s knowledge. Additionally, MatSci-LLMs should provide executable
procedures for real-world experiments through machine-machine and human-
machine interfaces.

The advent of large language models (LLMs) has started to reshape many
technology development efforts and research roadmaps. Apart from significantly
impacting the space of natural language processing, LLMs have had significant
impact on many related fields, such as computer vision with text-to-image
generators (Zhang et al., 2023), and have sparked the creation of efforts to
integrate their capabilities into diverse industries. Examples of these
efforts include task automation in healthcare (He et al., 2023), legal (Dahl
et al., 2024), finance (Wu et al., 2023a), software engineering (Fan et al.,
2023) and multiple scientific fields. The successful application of LLMs to
materials science has the potential to transform the field by accelerating the
discovery, synthesis and analysis of new materials that can address some of
today’s complex societal-scale challenges, such as climate change, energy
security, sustainable agriculture and manufacturing, personalized medical
devices, and access to more powerful computing systems. While recent research
work has seen increased adoption of LLMs in adjacent scientific fields, such
as chemistry (Jablonka et al., 2023) and diverse areas of biology (Lin et al.,
2023; Hsu et al., 2022; Xu et al., 2023; Cui et al., 2023; Dalla-Torre et al.,
2023), the application of LLMs in materials science has been significantly
slower. In this paper, we analyze current failures of LLMs in materials
science, and propose requirements for MATerials SCIence LLMs (MatSci-LLMs)
along with a roadmap to enable the impactful application of MatSci-LLMs for
furthering the field of materials science.

###  1.1 MatSci-LLM Requirements

Materials science is a highly interdisciplinary field – the first scientific
branch that emerged out of fusion of different branches (physics, chemistry,
mechanical engineering, and metallurgy) rather than a division – that studies
how the interaction of atomic matter affects the properties and behavior of
materials systems across diverse sets of conditions. The broad scope of
materials systems encompasses multiple physical scales ranging from
nanostructures with a small number of atoms which are used in modern computing
devices, to continuum materials, such as metals and cement, that make up
modern infrastructure like roads, bridges and buildings. Moreover, the wide
range of materials application can range from electronic materials (e.g.,
transistors, batteries), to chemical materials (e.g., polymers) to biological
materials (e.g., medical implants), each of which have very different
requirements and application environments. As such materials science often
borrows concepts from related scientific fields, including physics, chemistry
and biology, leading to vast and dynamic body of work covered by the field.
This diversity also informs the wide range of tasks that materials scientists
perform across different subfields, which further informs the requirements of
MatSci-LLMs.

Given the diversity of materials science knowledge and its associated
technical tasks, we propose that MatSci-LLM should meet the following
requirements shown in Figure 1: 1. _Domain Knowledge & Grounded Reasoning:_
MatSci-LLMs should have an understanding of materials science as a subject
area to provide useful information to material scientists and be able to
reason over core materials science principles, 2. _Augmenting Materials
Scientists:_ MatSci-LLMs should have the ability to perform useful tasks to
accelerate materials science research that augments the work of materials
scientists in reliable and interpretable manner.

Domain Knowledge & Grounded Reasoning: Recent research efforts have yielded
progress towards infusing materials science domain knowledge into LLMs to
solve text-based tasks. Early work, such as Walker et al. (2021); Gupta et al.
(2022); Huang & Cole (2022) focused on training BERT (Devlin et al., 2019)
architecture on domain-specific text corpora relevant to materials science. A
detailed analysis of these and other scientific language models by Song et al.
(2023a) revealed that domain-specific pretraining did infuse the language
models with relevant materials knowledge showing the importance of building
high-quality materials science language datasets. Recent works by Song et al.
(2023b) and Xie et al. (2023) showed that instruction fine-tuning leveraging
commercial scale LLMs can further improve performance on materials science
language tasks. While this suggests that practical materials science can be
extracted from today’s commercial LLMs, such as GPT-3.5, Claude and GPT-4,
their knowledge of the materials science remains incomplete as shown by Zaki
et al. (2024). As we discuss in Section 2, grounded reasoning over materials
science principles remains an ongoing challenge.

Augmenting Materials Scientists: Research work in this direction has been
primarily limited to adjacent domains, in particular chemistry. Jablonka et
al. (2023) showed different applications of LLMs across diverse chemistry
tasks, and Bran et al. (2023) and Boiko et al. (2023) provided examples of how
a tool-agumented GPT-4 can perform real-world experimental planning and
execution based on user queries. While such works show great relevance to
materials science, they are incomplete in addressing the vast diversity of
knowledge and scientific tasks in materials science, thereby falling short on
the criteria needed to be considered MatSci-LLMs. One concrete difference
between chemistry LLMs and MatSci-LLMs, for example, is the fact that IUPAC
names in chemistry make the identification and tracking of molecular
structures significantly easier. As discussed in Section 3, the materials
domain contains much greater diversity including periodic crystal structures,
surfaces, nanostructures, metals and alloys, and disordered materials like
glasses, limiting the degree of systematization that can be achieved for
indexing these materials with natural language.

###  1.2 What is needed for Materials Science LLMs?

To fully unlock the power of LLMs for materials discovery, further progress is
needed along the following directions:

  1. 1.

Hypothesis Generation Grounded on Materials Science Knowledge:  MatSci-LLMs
require understanding of diverse materials science knowledge and the ability
to reason over core domain principles. This will enable MatSci-LLMs to answer
queries of domain-specific questions and generate useful hypotheses that can
be verified with real-world experiments. State-of-the-art LLMs struggle to
provide well-reasoned answers that reference relevant supporting evidence for
in depth questions. While ongoing progress highlights the capability of modern
LLMs to provide relevant materials science knowledge (Song et al., 2023b),
clear gaps remain (Zaki et al., 2024).

  2. 2.

Multi-Modal Materials Science Datasets: To enable MatSci-LLMs to capture the
true extent of human knowledge of materials science, we require large-scale,
high-quality, multi-modal datasets based primarily on peer-reviewed materials
science publications. Much of the knowledge in the materials science
literature is contained in tables, figures and other modalities that express
important materials properties and behavior in addition to the physical and
chemical relationships that underlie them. Additionally, modern LLMs still
struggle to understand domain-specific materials science language and
effectively process materials science notation, including chemical formulas
and mathematical formulas expressed in line with other text.

  3. 3.

Real-World Materials Design: Connecting MatSci-LLMs to real-world simulation
and experimental tools in creative ways can comprehensively accelerate
materials design, synthesis and analysis by enabling end-to-end automation. As
described in Section 5, MatSci-LLMs can provide powerful human-machine and
machine-machine interfaces for increased automation in materials science
research, materials discovery and commercial materials production. Research in
chemistry LLMs (Bran et al., 2023; Boiko et al., 2023) has shown early promise
in deploying tool-augmented LLMs in for end-to-end materials design tasks
driven by text-based user input.

##  2 Failure Cases of LLMs in Materials Science

While recent work has shown great promise in applying LLMs to materials
science and adjacent fields, it is important to understand the limitations of
LLMs on a broad set of challenges in the materials science domain. To this
extent, several efforts have focused on tasks related to question-answering,
code writing, named-entity recognitions, abstract classification, and
composition extraction from tables in materials literature (Zaki et al., 2024;
Gupta et al., 2023; Song et al., 2023b, a). Here, we outline some of the
failure cases demonstrating the need of developing robust MatSci-LLMs before
deploying them for practical applications.

Proficient LLMs such as GPT-4 (Achiam et al., 2023) and LLaMA-2 (Touvron et
al., 2023) are trained on vast corpora of publicly available text data
(Computer, 2023). Accordingly, commercial LLMs should have had some reasonable
exposure to the materials science domain based on the wikipedia and other
public domain information on materials science. To evaluate the MatSci domain
knowledge of LLMs, Zaki et al. (2024) curated a dataset of 650 questions
requiring undergraduate-level knowledge to answer them. The analysis of the
responses from LLMs revealed that GPT-4 with chain-of-thought (CoT) (Wei et
al., 2022) reasoning performed the best with a score of 62% accuracy.
Interestingly, GPT4-CoT performed the worst in numerical type questions with a
score of only 39%. This suggests that present LLMs perform poorly in
identifying the correct equations, grounding the context by substituting
appropriate numerical values, and subsequently solving the original question.
Moreover, a comparison of the performance of LLMs with human performance in
the same exam revealed that GPT4-CoT, while outperforming other baselines,
consistently obtained only 50% of the top performing human and ultimately
never cleared the cutoff to qualify the exams.

A task where LLMs are known to perform well is code generation (Chen et al.,
2021; Lai et al., 2023; Zan et al., 2023). While code generation for chemistry
tasks has yielded mostly promising results as detailed in White et al. (2023),
Zaki et al. (2024) evaluated the performance of LLMs on code generation tasks
as well and found that GPT-4 exhibited an accuracy of only 71% even in code
writing tasks related to materials science. A careful analysis of the
questions and code-writing tasks where GPT4-CoT performed poorly reveals two
salient conclusions: (i) LLMs have difficulty in solving complex numerical
problems, not just because of the complex arithmetic (which could potentially
be solved by translating the numerical question into code (Wu et al., 2023b)),
but because of their inability to ground the available data in the given
equation. This includes wrong substitution, incorrect conversion of units, and
missing constants while converting units (e.g., taking into account the speed
of light, Avagadro number, etc.). (ii) LLMs have difficulty in understanding
the information related to 3D structure. Specifically, the crystal structures
and the symmetries associated with materials are misinterpreted leading to
incorrect conclusions. Zaki et al. (2024) observed these errors consistently
in both code generation tasks and question-answering tasks for multiple LLMs.

To elucidate current LLM failure cases in materials science, consider the
question below. “The materials belonging to which one of the following crystal
classes would be both piezoelectric and ferroelectric: (A) 222 (B) 4mm (C) -1
(D) 2/m”. Here, while (B) 4mm is the correct answer, GPT4-CoT suggests 2/m as
the correct answer with the reasoning that “(D) 2/m: This crystal class does
not have a center of symmetry, which means it can be piezoelectric.
Additionally, it is a polar crystal class, making it able to be ferroelectric
as well.”. However, this reasoning is incorrect—2/m is centrosymmetric, and
hence is not a polar crystal. Answering this question requires the knowledge
of crystal structures, which needs to be grounded on the concept of polarity
of atoms based on the crystal structure. Although the LLM understands this
requirement, it performs poor reasoning and inference, potentially due to the
lack of such data during training. Another example worth noting is the
following question. “The Miller indices of the first three Bragg peaks in the
X-ray diffraction pattern obtained from a polycrystalline iron sample at room
temperature are (A) (111), (200), (220) (B) (100), (110), (111) (C) (100),
(110), (200) (D) (110), (200), (220)”. While the correct answer is (D),
GPT4-CoT suggests (C) as the answer, based on the reasoning that
“systematically listing all possible combinations of h, k, and l, and
identifying those that satisfy the BCC selection rule (h + k + l = even), we
get the following allowable Miller indices as: (100), (110), and (200)”.
However, this is contradictory as for the first Miller index (100) in the
list, h + k + l = 1 + 0 + 0 = 1, which is odd and not even. Accordingly, while
the understanding that the BCC selection rule requires (h + k + l) should be
even is correct, the LLM was unable to ground this concept correctly and
suggest the correct Miller indices. Ten such examples are listed in the
Appendix B, where we provide the question, the answer and the reasoning
provided by GPT-4, along with the correct solution. We observe consistent
mistakes made by GPT-4 in numerical errors and reasoning inconsistencies both
in conceptual materials science questions and in materials science code
generation tasks. These observations strongly suggest that LLMs need to be
exposed to more domain-specific information and develop greater reasoning
capabilities for them to be usable for any real-world application in this
domain.

LLM reasoning difficulties extend beyond the materials science domain,
including in general language tasks (BehnamGhader et al., 2023). Given the
great importance of reasoning abilities to formulate and test scientific
hypothesis, this remains a major gap in the development of MatSci-LLMs which
also has implications for the broader LLM community. While LLMs have shown
promise in solving concrete planning tasks, such as retrosynthesis planning
(Boiko et al., 2023; Bran et al., 2023), and executing code-based functions as
part of a greater workflow (Buehler, 2023; Yoshikawa et al., 2023), LLMs still
rely on human intervention and correction in many cases. In addition to
greater robustness, future LLMs can also benefit from greater interpretability
to accelerate hypothesis testing and enable scientists to better understand
the various aspects of the system they are interested in. This is especially
important in materials science where many experimental procedures can expose
valuable information about the underlying material properties and behavior
under diverse settings, which in turn can inform broader understanding of
fundamental physical and chemical relationships of the material system.

##  3 Grounding LLMs in Domain-Specific Language in Materials Science

The materials science domain requires great technical depth and breadth due to
field’s broad technical scope that interfaces with physics, chemistry, biology
and various engineering disciplines. Hence, materials science presents unique
challenges related to knowledge acquisition for domain-specific language
models. While some of the challenges, such as domain-specific notations, are
unique to materials science, others have a broad intersection with multiple
machine learning fields, such as multi-modal information extraction involving
text, images, and video.

Domain-Specific Notations: Unlike IUPAC (Hellwich et al., 2020) nomenclatures
in chemistry, there exist no standard notations for materials science; for
instance, NaAlSi2O8, Na2O.Al2O3.2SiO2, SiO2–0.5Na2O–0.5Al2O3 all represent the
same material in different contexts. Moreover, several common domain-specific
names are used to represent materials, including soda and lime for Na2CO3 and
CaCO3, respectively. Furthermore, some sub-domains, such as cement, employ
their own chemical notations, that are contradictory with the general
chemistry notation; C-S-H represents calcium silicate hydrate in cement
chemistry, whereas in standard chemistry notation, it represents carbon,
sulfur, and hydrogen, respectively. Similarly, there are several inconsistent
abbreviations to refer to properties in materials science that are used in the
literature. These abbreviations are sometimes specific to a given document or
can also be present in multiple documents. Thus, understanding these notations
require grounding of the LLMs to different domains with the right context.

Incomplete Descriptions: Research publications regularly refer to previous
works in the text to omit the specific information. This is exemplified by the
sentences such as “the fracture simulations were carried out using an
established methodology as outlined in Griffith et al.”; a common practice in
the materials science literature. Such approaches are also extremely common
when reporting experimental or simulation protocols, material compositions,
syntheses and testing conditions, and optimizing process parameters. The
context of the work reported in a manuscript, in this case, is thus grounded
in a different manuscript. Moreover, the descriptions can occasionally be
highly non-linear while referring to different sources in an extremely
complicated manner. Finally, there could be reference to the manuals of
different instruments and material sources, which are described elsewhere.
Thus, an LLM needs to procure information across multiple sources and process
it together in the proper context to create a sequential description of the
process and the related analysis that was carried out.

Text-to-Structure: Materials science employs text to represent several 3D or
2D structures in different ways. For instance, the crystal structures are
represented using the Wyckoff positions (Aroyo et al., 2006) –4mm in
crystallography represents a crystal structure, whereas in general literature
it might be confused with a distance metric (millimeter). Moreover, crystals
are represented using a widely used format known crystal information file
(CIF), which explains the details of the crystal along with the positions of
the atoms as shown in Appendix A with a CIF of Silicon. Current LLMs are
unable to read, interpret, or generate CIF, which are a strong limiting factor
for novel materials discovery. Similarly, there are several other approaches
to represent the 3D structure using text, such as xyz files or other software
specific files for diverse purposes. As such, the ability of LLMs to
understand such files plays a crucial role for materials domain. Recent work
by Gruver et al. (2023) shows that LLMs can generate correct CIF-formatted
materials with targeted fine-tuning, but fail to provide context describing
important details of the CIF file.

Multi-Modal Information Extraction: Text and Tables: Pertinent information for
materials in peer-reviewed papers are generally represented using multiple
modalities including text, tables, figures, and videos—audio is very rarely
used, although not absent. Significant progress has been made in effectively
extracting tabular information (Gupta et al., 2023; Zhao et al., 2023; Zhao &
Cole, 2022) with work still remaining on how to best make use of extracted
data to infuse the underlying knowledge of the tables into language models.
Extraction can be particularly challenging for property based data, which
often includes numbers that map to various types of scientific units. A simple
exercise on information extraction from tables revealed that GPT-4 was able to
extract only $\sim 55\%$ of materials properties from a table (Zaki et al.,
2024) in contrast to $\sim 73\%$ by a model trained for the task (Gupta et
al., 2023). This problem is amplified by the fact that more than 80% of
material compositions and properties are reported in tables (Hira et al.,
2023). Finally, in several cases table information is incomplete, even when
read together with the caption. For instance, when reporting the composition
of Magnesium alloys, many tables in research papers report the values of all
the components other than Magnesium in a given alloy. Thus, the percentage of
Magnesium in these alloys need to be computed as 100-(the sum of reported
elements in the tables for a given alloy). Such a task requires the grounding
of the table information along with the text, and then performing the
necessary arithmetic to obtain the percentage.

Multi-Modal Information Extraction: Text and Figures: Materials are
characterized by many experimental methods such Raman analysis, X-ray
diffraction (XRD), X-ray fluoroscence, scanning electron micrographs or atomic
force microscopy, the results of which are represented in figures. Such
information could include the visual representation as captured by the
measurement technique, such as an optical micrograph, or a plot that
summarizes this information as in the case of XRD patterns. Moreover, this
information would be further elaborated briefly in the figure caption followed
by detailed explanation in the text. A sample text from a materials literature
could be as follows: “The XRD patterns shown in Figure XY(a) suggest that the
sample is amorphous and does not have any crystalline content. Further, the
XRF in Fig. XY(b) reveals the presence of clustering of Calcium instead of a
uniform distribution”. In this particular case, the text and figure need to be
interpreted together. Moreover, the specific aspects of the image that allows
one to make an interpretation such as the clustering of calcium or the
specific feature of the XRD patterns that allows a researcher to identify that
the material is amorphous is not labeled. In order for the LLM to learn these
aspects, a large number of images and aligned text are need for joint
training.

Multi-Modal Information Extraction: Text, Figures, Tables, and Videos:
Additional modalities of presenting relevant information involve a combination
of text, figures, and tables. In such cases, the information from the table
should be read along with the figures while grounding the reasoning in the
context of the manuscript, all of which further compound the cumulative
importance of multi-modal information extraction. Occasionally, additional
modalities such as audio-visual files are used to demonstrate material
response. This includes material failure modes illustrating cracks, crystal
growth, thermal response, response of actuators, and simulations amongst
others. In this case, there are additional challenges that require the
training LLMs to properly link the information in video, figures, and text and
tables. These are open problems for which the community may need to develop
novel methods and architectures.

While these challenges are far from exhaustive, we note that the tasks
mentioned here reveal novel domain-specific problems whose solutions can have
potentially strong impact on other scientific and machine learning domains as
well.

###  3.1 Context Across Multiple Documents & Sources

Most of the information generated through the process of scientific inquiry is
documented and communicated through natural language in peer reviewed
publications. Understanding this text – and potentially extracting the
information – presents several unique challenges distinct from other domains
(Hira et al., 2023). One of the major challenges in this regard includes
understanding the importance of context across multiple documents and sources
of information. As highlighted above, this is additionally complicated by the
fact that a given material can have multiple correct names and designations,
meaning that important information can be contained across all of the names
for a given material. Having unique IUPAC-style naming conventions can
accelerate the deployment of LLMs as observed in chemistry (Jablonka et al.,
2023), yet this is often not sufficient to capture all the relevant details
needed to fully understand materials properties and synthesis leading to the
development of additional data initiatives to fill that gap (Kearnes et al.,
2021; Mercado et al., 2023). Hence while proposing an IUPAC-style naming
convention might seem like a natural solution to aid the deployment of LLMs in
materials science, many proposals of such conventions have previously fallen
short given the vast diversity of the field.

###  3.2 Diverse Experimental and Simulation Procedures

While understanding context is the first step towards automated discovery, the
next natural step is to identify the appropriate experimental or simulation
protocols relevant to the context. There are a multitude of experimental and
simulation procedures to evaluate the same objective. As such, understanding
them and choosing the relevant one or a set of relevant experiments is a
challenging task, which requires the domain-specific information and
reasoning. Early works have shown some promise in providing useful tools for
creating synthesis procedures of specific materials (Olivetti et al., 2020;
Jensen et al., 2021), but much work remains in effectively deploying LLMs for
these tasks. Additionally, materials synthesis procedures provide additional
challenges given the diversity of synthesis techniques and processing
conditions that can be observed across materials design use cases even within
similar materials classes. Similarly, effective in-silico design and filtering
of materials requires accurate simulations, and the inability to generate the
correct codes grounded in the context can make this task challenging. This is
exemplified by the mistakes in the code generation tasks where the LLMs are
unable to either ground the concept correctly, or the generated code exhibits
numerical errors. Thus, it is imperative that large amounts of curated and
complete data associated with simulation and experimental procedures are used
to train effective MatSci-LLMs.

##  4 Multi-Modal Materials Science Corpus Building

The performance of a language model depends on the quality of the dataset on
which they are trained on. Thus, dataset creation remains an integral part in
enabling progress across various deep learning subfields, including computer
vision, graph learning, as well as natural language in both general and
scientific domains. Materials science has several domain-specific variations
in terms of text, and recent developments in multi-modal language models
motivate the development of datasets that align the additional modalities such
as figures, tables, and images. Given the vast amount of scientific
information expressed in diverse modalities, multi-modal language models would
unlock significantly more powerful capabilities for scientific language
modeling.

The gold standard data for training these LLMs for materials science is mostly
contained in peer-reviewed publications at established editorials, such as the
family of journals at Elsevier, Royal Society, American Society and Springer
Nature amongst others. Unfortunately, much of the content of peer-reviewed
publications at established journals remains inaccessible beyond paywalls
limiting public access, which makes it difficult to access these valuable text
data. Accordingly, it is unlikely that any general-purpose language models,
such as GPT-4 or LLaMa, have had access to this data, which likely contributes
to their poor performance on materials science tasks highlighted in Section 2.
While there have been promising development in making scientific text-data
available via open-access through various pre-print servers and portals like
Semantic Scholar, text-data obtained from such sources often requires
extensive cleaning and preparation processess before becoming useful for
training scientific LLMs (Lo et al., 2020). Research work in making text-data
more accessible has already produced meaningful results in making language
model training and evaluation more successful (Song et al., 2023a, b).
However, curating such data on which a LLM can be trained requires addressing
additional data-related challenges described below.

Data Availability: While families of journals such as Elsevier and Springer
provide a text and data-mining APIs based on paid subscription, machine
readable formats such as xml files are available only for the manuscripts
published in the 21st century. Almost all the publications from 20th century
or earlier are only available as PDFs or scanned files of the original
hardcopy publication which are not easily machine readable. Thus, a vast
amount of data representing the cumulative scientific endeavor before 21st
century is not available for LLM training. Additionally, many other family of
peer-reviewed journal do not either allow text and data mining, nor have a
framework to support it. Data sourced from preprint servers, such as arXiv,
often require extensive cleaning to make them amendable to LLM training.

Large-Scale Description & Annotation: When data is obtained from multiple
sources and in multiple modalities, such as tables, text, images, videos, and
codes, appropriate descriptions that align the various modalities are required
to enable effective training. For instance, a CIF document of Silicon should
have a detailed description about what information is contained in the file,
so that the LLM can learn to interpret the information in the CIF in addition
to understanding its format. However, such large-scale annotations are
currently unavailable and would require input from domain experts for them to
be reliable.

Linking Multiple Entities: While obtaining data on multiple entities is
possible, linking them appropriately so they can be read together with
relevant context is a non-trivial task. For instance, the description of a
figure or a table in a manuscript could be spread across multiple paragraphs
and even the supplementary material. This is in contrast to standard machine
learning approaches where a figure and description are given together while
training. Thus, developing a dataset that links multiple entities
appropriately and employing an appropriate training scheme that respects the
dataset and the context remains an open challenge for the research community.

Handling External References: Another major challenge while curating a dataset
based on peer-reviewed publications relates to the use of external references.
In a manuscript, references to multiple documents will be made to either
support the claims made in the current work and thereby base the manuscript to
be read in the context of the referred work. In other words, information in
the present manuscript is grounded on the claims or observations in the
reference manuscript, which in turn is grounded in its own references. Dataset
and training schemes developed to train a MatSci-LLM should respect this fact
to reduce hallucinations and provide well-reasoned hypotheses. It is worth
noting that several LLMs often hallucinate when asked for references.
Furthermore, when asked to generate a text in the form of a scientific
manuscript, these LLMs generate fictitious references which are arbitrarily
written to fit sentences generated in the process. This motivates the need to
appropriately account for external references in the training data.

Altogether, these challenges suggest that the development of a dataset for
MatSci-LLMs requires a close collaboration between multiple entities,
including publishers, government, industry and academia. Moreover, MatSci-LLMs
warrant novel machine learning solutions for several new challenges such as:
(i) handling old and non-machine readable data through computer vision
techniques that can convert the scanned documents to text respecting the
original formats, and (ii) novel machine learning methods that can handle
external references and multi-modal data that are linked together across
different contexts. Such solutions could have implications beyond the
materials science domain, such as digitizing old historical documents relevant
to the social sciences including history, law, and finance.

##  5 Roadmap for Application of MatSci-LLMs

One of the most exciting opportunities is the application of MatSci-LLMs for
end-to-end automation of materials design. Moreoever, automated materials
design can in turn accelerate research in understanding the diverse scientific
complexities involved in materials science. Figure 2 shows the proposed
outline of an end-to-end materials discovery framework with MatSci-LLM at the
core. In particular, we believe that MatSci-LLMs have the potential to enable
three breakthrough capabilities: 1. Augmenting materials science knowledge
with automated knowledge base generation that enhances human understanding; 2.
Automated in-silico materials design with AI-enabled materials generation and
high-fidelity simulations; 3. Self-driving laboratories for materials
synthesis and characterization in the real world.

Figure 2: Roadmap of a Mat-Sci LLM based materials discovery cycle. The cycle
starts with materials query from a researcher that specifies desired
properties or an application. The MatSci-LLM then draws from external and
internal knowledge bases to generate a materials design hypothesis which is
evaluated in-silico. Next, the MatSci-LLM ingests the in-silico results and
prepares an experimental plan to synthesize and characterize the material,
after which the MatSci-LLM interfaces with the relevant machines to execute
the experimental workflow. The final result is then shown to the user for
evaluation and feedback. Each stage can interact with another for refinement
and improvement by the MatSci-LLM.

###  5.1 Automated Knowledge Base Generation

Recent work by Cox et al.  and Buehler (2024) have shown that intentional use
of LLMs has the potential to broaden the availability of useful scientific
knowledge by externalizing the knowledge of domain-specific LLMs as
structured, human-interpretable knowledge. Cox et al.  generated annotations
for a database of $>15,000$ protein-coding by using robust methods that rely
on citations and cross-checking of the generated information against the
scientific literature. Buehler (2024) externalized LLM knowledge in a
structured knowledge graph, which can be probed by a scientist to further
their understanding and potentially make corrections and adjustments as
needed. Taken together and expanded to related fields, these knowledge bases
then become valuable resources for vast sets of engineering applications,
spanning the diverse field of materials science and technology.

###  5.2 Automated In-Silico Materials Design

One of the areas of greatest potential impact for MatSci-LLMs is their ability
to provide interfaces between humans and machines. Given the usability of
natural language as a human-friendly interface and the ability of LLMs to
understand, process and generate text in various formats, including computer
code, there is a tremendous opportunity to streamline complex scientific
processes. Using code generation, tool-agumented MatSci-LLMs can aid in the
discovery of new materials and execution complex simulation workflows. Recent
work by Buehler (2023) shows a possible example of how LLMs can be integrated
with relevant tools to perform end-to-end insilico design of polymer materials
where the LLM can generate a new molecular compound in SMILES notation and
then query different LLM-based agents to perform relevant calculations for the
same materials. Further examples in Buehler (2023) show how the LLM system can
also set up the relevant computation environment by installing relevant
packages, showing further benefits of end-to-end tool integration. While many
of these systems have not yet been tested at large scales, this represents a
great step forward in constructing impactful MatSci-LLMs. In addition to code
generation, MatSci-LLMs can also serve as generative models for new materials
(Flam-Shepherd & Aspuru-Guzik, 2023; Gruver et al., 2023) that augment current
graph or point-cloud based representations (Xie et al., 2021; Jiao et al.,
2023; Govindarajan et al., 2023; Merchant et al., 2023; Zeni et al., 2023). As
such, MatSci-LLMs can devise new materials solution based on their implicit
knowledge in addition to leveraging other generative methods as tools for
hypothesis generation.

While recent work provides many reasons to be optimistic about LLMs
capabilities to solve concrete in-silico materials science problems, much
published work fails to include negative results outlining current LLM
failures. As such, it is important to continue to have broader analysis of
LLMs’ capabilities for code generation in materials science similar to Zaki et
al. (2024), which can point to relevant research directions for more robust
integration of MatSci-LLMs into materials simulation workflows.

###  5.3 Self-Driving Laboratories for Sim2Mat

Bringing simulated materials to reality (Sim2Mat) and aligning both the
experimental and simulation results is the ultimate goal of end-to-end
materials design. To that end, MatSci-LLMs can provide a powerful tool to
accelerate the process of designing relevant experiments and accelerating
their execution. One encouraging fact is that recent research work has seen
greater adoption of human-machine interfaces to accelerate the discovery and
synthesis of complex materials systems (Kanarik et al., 2023; Vasudevan et
al., 2022), as well as the development of automated self-driving materials
laboratories (Sim et al., 2023; Rupnow et al., 2023). This provides a great
opportunity for MatSci-LLMs to further accelerate the process of materials
development by providing a connective tissue between the various machines
involved in experimental execution. Sim et al. (2023) provides an example of
how different machines in a laboratory can be connected by a unified software,
which then provides an opportunity for MatSci-LLMs to directly interface
between machines by translating between distinct software languages required
for machine-machine interfaces. Additionally, MatSci-LLMs can provide a
language-based interface to human scientists who can define design
requirements using natural language similar to Bran et al. (2023); Boiko et
al. (2023), where experimental workflows are executed by tool-augmented LLMs.
Recent work by Yoshikawa et al. (2023) also shows that LLMs can provide
practical interfaces that more effectively connect scientists to robotic
systems to perform chemical tasks. As shown in Figure 2, the ability of
MatSci-LLMs to execute experimental workflows has the potential to fully close
the loop of the materials discovery cycle providing end-to-end automation of
materials design in-silico, followed by automated synthesis with recipes that
are both human readable and machine executable to bring the desired material
into the real-world, finalized by analysis and characterization which also
involves machine-to-machine and human-to-machine interactions.

##  6 Conclusion

The virtuous cycle show in Figure 2 has the potential to enable impactful
scientific discoveries through end-to-end automation while concurrently
augmenting human knowledge through the discovery of new physical and chemical
relationships for an expanding set of materials. The unique challenges of
deploying LLMs in materials science oulined in this paper, however, require
further research to make MatSci-LLMs effective scientific assistants.
Meaningful research advances will require advances along the interface many
fields, including machine learning, materials simulation, materials synthesis,
materials characterization and robotics.

##  7 Broader Impact

Among the 17 sustainable development goals (SDGs) proposed by United Nations,
10 can be achieved or accelerated through materials innovation. The
development of an end-to-end framework for accelerating materials discovery
can have broader impacts in several domains such as healthcare, agriculture,
energy, sustainability, water filtration, and carbon capture, to name a few.
Traditional materials discovery remains an extremely slow process often taking
a period of 20-30 years from starting a design to final deployment. AI-driven
materials discovery has a potential to reduce this cycle to a few years or
even months, thereby providing a means to address major societal-scale
challenges. Moreover, the availability of cloud computing and web services can
make this process extremely efficient and economical leading to
democratization of materials discovery. This could reduce the gap between
large corporations and small and medium scale industries allowing materials
discovery without the availability of large lab facilities and vast R&D
budgets. While Mat-Sci LLMs have great promise in reducing the cost and
democratizing materials discovery, great care must be taken to ensure that
MatSci-LLMs and all related technologies be used in an ethical and harm-
limiting manner. Additionally, there could be further unintended harmful
consequences from the use of MatSci-LLMs for materials discovery in the use of
natural resources. One can imagine a case where new materials discoveries
could put greater demand on minerals that were previously unterutilized. This,
in turn, could result in significant impacts on the local communities and the
surrounding ecosystem and would therefore require action at policy level to
avoid inadvertent consequences.

## References

  * Achiam et al. (2023) Achiam, J., Adler, S., Agarwal, S., Ahmad, L., Akkaya, I., Aleman, F. L., Almeida, D., Altenschmidt, J., Altman, S., Anadkat, S., et al.  Gpt-4 technical report.  _arXiv preprint arXiv:2303.08774_ , 2023.
  * Aroyo et al. (2006) Aroyo, M. I., Perez-Mato, J. M., Capillas, C., Kroumova, E., Ivantchev, S., Madariaga, G., Kirov, A., and Wondratschek, H.  Bilbao crystallographic server: I. databases and crystallographic computing programs.  _Zeitschrift für Kristallographie-Crystalline Materials_ , 221(1):15–27, 2006.
  * BehnamGhader et al. (2023) BehnamGhader, P., Miret, S., and Reddy, S.  Can retriever-augmented language models reason? the blame game between the retriever and the language model.  In Bouamor, H., Pino, J., and Bali, K. (eds.), _Findings of the Association for Computational Linguistics: EMNLP 2023_ , pp. 15492–15509, Singapore, December 2023. Association for Computational Linguistics.  doi: 10.18653/v1/2023.findings-emnlp.1036.  URL https://aclanthology.org/2023.findings-emnlp.1036.
  * Boiko et al. (2023) Boiko, D. A., MacKnight, R., Kline, B., and Gomes, G.  Autonomous chemical research with large language models.  _Nature_ , 624(7992):570–578, 2023.
  * Bran et al. (2023) Bran, A. M., Cox, S., White, A. D., and Schwaller, P.  Chemcrow: Augmenting large-language models with chemistry tools.  _arXiv preprint arXiv:2304.05376_ , 2023.
  * Buehler (2023) Buehler, M. J.  Generative retrieval-augmented ontologic graph and multiagent strategies for interpretive large language model-based materials design.  _ACS Engineering Au_ , 2023.
  * Buehler (2024) Buehler, M. J.  Mechgpt, a language-based strategy for mechanics and materials modeling that connects knowledge across scales, disciplines, and modalities.  _Applied Mechanics Reviews_ , 76(2):021001, 2024.
  * Chen et al. (2021) Chen, M., Tworek, J., Jun, H., Yuan, Q., Pinto, H. P. d. O., Kaplan, J., Edwards, H., Burda, Y., Joseph, N., Brockman, G., et al.  Evaluating large language models trained on code.  _arXiv preprint arXiv:2107.03374_ , 2021.
  * Computer (2023) Computer, T.  Redpajama: an open dataset for training large language models, 2023.  URL https://github.com/togethercomputer/RedPajama-Data.
  * (10) Cox, S., Hammerling, M., Lála, J., Laurent, J., Rodriques, S., Rubashkin, M., and White, A.  Wikicrow: Automating synthesis of human scientific knowledge.
  * Cui et al. (2023) Cui, H., Wang, C., Maan, H., Pang, K., Luo, F., and Wang, B.  scgpt: Towards building a foundation model for single-cell multi-omics using generative ai.  _bioRxiv_ , 2023.
  * Dahl et al. (2024) Dahl, M., Magesh, V., Suzgun, M., and Ho, D. E.  Large legal fictions: Profiling legal hallucinations in large language models.  _arXiv preprint arXiv:2401.01301_ , 2024.
  * Dalla-Torre et al. (2023) Dalla-Torre, H., Gonzalez, L., Mendoza Revilla, J., Lopez Carranza, N., Henryk Grywaczewski, A., Oteri, F., Dallago, C., Trop, E., Sirelkhatim, H., Richard, G., et al.  The nucleotide transformer: Building and evaluating robust foundation models for human genomics.  _bioRxiv_ , pp. 2023–01, 2023.
  * Devlin et al. (2019) Devlin, J., Chang, M.-W., Lee, K., and Toutanova, K.  BERT: Pre-training of deep bidirectional transformers for language understanding.  In Burstein, J., Doran, C., and Solorio, T. (eds.), _Proceedings of the 2019 Conference of the North American Chapter of the Association for Computational Linguistics: Human Language Technologies, Volume 1 (Long and Short Papers)_ , pp. 4171–4186, Minneapolis, Minnesota, June 2019. Association for Computational Linguistics.  doi: 10.18653/v1/N19-1423.  URL https://aclanthology.org/N19-1423.
  * Fan et al. (2023) Fan, A., Gokkaya, B., Harman, M., Lyubarskiy, M., Sengupta, S., Yoo, S., and Zhang, J. M.  Large language models for software engineering: Survey and open problems.  _arXiv preprint arXiv:2310.03533_ , 2023.
  * Flam-Shepherd & Aspuru-Guzik (2023) Flam-Shepherd, D. and Aspuru-Guzik, A.  Language models can generate molecules, materials, and protein binding sites directly in three dimensions as xyz, cif, and pdb files.  _arXiv preprint arXiv:2305.05708_ , 2023.
  * Govindarajan et al. (2023) Govindarajan, P., Miret, S., Rector-Brooks, J., Phielipp, M., Rajendran, J., and Chandar, S.  Learning conditional policies for crystal design using offline reinforcement learning.  In _AI for Accelerated Materials Design - NeurIPS 2023 Workshop_ , 2023.  URL https://openreview.net/forum?id=VbjD8w2ctG.
  * Gruver et al. (2023) Gruver, N., Sriram, A., Madotto, A., Wilson, A. G., Zitnick, C. L., and Ulissi, Z. W.  Fine-tuned language models generate stable inorganic materials as text.  In _AI for Accelerated Materials Design-NeurIPS 2023 Workshop_ , 2023.
  * Gupta et al. (2022) Gupta, T., Zaki, M., Krishnan, N. A., and Mausam.  Matscibert: A materials domain language model for text mining and information extraction.  _npj Computational Materials_ , 8(1):102, 2022.
  * Gupta et al. (2023) Gupta, T., Zaki, M., Khatsuriya, D., Hira, K., Krishnan, N. M. A., and Mausam.  DiSCoMaT: Distantly supervised composition extraction from tables in materials science articles.  In Rogers, A., Boyd-Graber, J., and Okazaki, N. (eds.), _Proceedings of the 61st Annual Meeting of the Association for Computational Linguistics (Volume 1: Long Papers)_ , pp. 13465–13483, Toronto, Canada, July 2023. Association for Computational Linguistics.  doi: 10.18653/v1/2023.acl-long.753.  URL https://aclanthology.org/2023.acl-long.753.
  * He et al. (2023) He, K., Mao, R., Lin, Q., Ruan, Y., Lan, X., Feng, M., and Cambria, E.  A survey of large language models for healthcare: from data, technology, and applications to accountability and ethics.  _arXiv preprint arXiv:2310.05694_ , 2023.
  * Hellwich et al. (2020) Hellwich, K.-H., Hartshorn, R. M., Yerin, A., Damhus, T., and Hutton, A. T.  Brief guide to the nomenclature of organic chemistry (iupac technical report).  _Pure and Applied Chemistry_ , 92(3):527–539, 2020.
  * Hira et al. (2023) Hira, K., Zaki, M., Sheth, D. B., ., M., and Krishnan, N. M. A.  Reconstructing materials tetrahedron: Challenges in materials information extraction.  In _AI for Accelerated Materials Design - NeurIPS 2023 Workshop_ , 2023.  URL https://openreview.net/forum?id=u6ndfkFRJC.
  * Hsu et al. (2022) Hsu, C., Verkuil, R., Liu, J., Lin, Z., Hie, B., Sercu, T., Lerer, A., and Rives, A.  Learning inverse folding from millions of predicted structures.  In Chaudhuri, K., Jegelka, S., Song, L., Szepesvari, C., Niu, G., and Sabato, S. (eds.), _Proceedings of the 39th International Conference on Machine Learning_ , volume 162 of _Proceedings of Machine Learning Research_ , pp. 8946–8970. PMLR, 17–23 Jul 2022.  URL https://proceedings.mlr.press/v162/hsu22a.html.
  * Huang & Cole (2022) Huang, S. and Cole, J. M.  Batterybert: A pretrained language model for battery database enhancement.  _Journal of Chemical Information and Modeling_ , 62(24):6365–6377, 2022.
  * Jablonka et al. (2023) Jablonka, K. M., Ai, Q., Al-Feghali, A., Badhwar, S., Bocarsly, J. D., Bran, A. M., Bringuier, S., Brinson, L. C., Choudhary, K., Circi, D., et al.  14 examples of how llms can transform materials science and chemistry: a reflection on a large language model hackathon.  _Digital Discovery_ , 2(5):1233–1250, 2023.
  * Jensen et al. (2021) Jensen, Z., Kwon, S., Schwalbe-Koda, D., Paris, C., Gómez-Bombarelli, R., Román-Leshkov, Y., Corma, A., Moliner, M., and Olivetti, E. A.  Discovering relationships between osdas and zeolites through data mining and generative neural networks.  _ACS central science_ , 7(5):858–867, 2021.
  * Jiao et al. (2023) Jiao, R., Huang, W., Lin, P., Han, J., Chen, P., Lu, Y., and Liu, Y.  Crystal structure prediction by joint equivariant diffusion.  In _Thirty-seventh Conference on Neural Information Processing Systems_ , 2023.  URL https://openreview.net/forum?id=DNdN26m2Jk.
  * Kanarik et al. (2023) Kanarik, K. J., Osowiecki, W. T., Lu, Y., Talukder, D., Roschewsky, N., Park, S. N., Kamon, M., Fried, D. M., and Gottscho, R. A.  Human–machine collaboration for improving semiconductor process development.  _Nature_ , 616(7958):707–711, 2023.
  * Kearnes et al. (2021) Kearnes, S. M., Maser, M. R., Wleklinski, M., Kast, A., Doyle, A. G., Dreher, S. D., Hawkins, J. M., Jensen, K. F., and Coley, C. W.  The open reaction database.  _Journal of the American Chemical Society_ , 143(45):18820–18826, 2021.
  * Lai et al. (2023) Lai, Y., Li, C., Wang, Y., Zhang, T., Zhong, R., Zettlemoyer, L., Yih, W.-t., Fried, D., Wang, S., and Yu, T.  Ds-1000: A natural and reliable benchmark for data science code generation.  In _International Conference on Machine Learning_ , pp. 18319–18345. PMLR, 2023.
  * Lin et al. (2023) Lin, Z., Akin, H., Rao, R., Hie, B., Zhu, Z., Lu, W., Smetanin, N., Verkuil, R., Kabeli, O., Shmueli, Y., et al.  Evolutionary-scale prediction of atomic-level protein structure with a language model.  _Science_ , 379(6637):1123–1130, 2023.
  * Lo et al. (2020) Lo, K., Wang, L. L., Neumann, M., Kinney, R., and Weld, D.  S2ORC: The semantic scholar open research corpus.  In _Proceedings of the 58th Annual Meeting of the Association for Computational Linguistics_ , pp. 4969–4983, Online, July 2020. Association for Computational Linguistics.  doi: 10.18653/v1/2020.acl-main.447.  URL https://www.aclweb.org/anthology/2020.acl-main.447.
  * Mercado et al. (2023) Mercado, R., Kearnes, S. M., and Coley, C. W.  Data sharing in chemistry: lessons learned and a case for mandating structured reaction data.  _Journal of Chemical Information and Modeling_ , 63(14):4253–4265, 2023.
  * Merchant et al. (2023) Merchant, A., Batzner, S., Schoenholz, S. S., Aykol, M., Cheon, G., and Cubuk, E. D.  Scaling deep learning for materials discovery.  _Nature_ , pp. 1–6, 2023.
  * Olivetti et al. (2020) Olivetti, E. A., Cole, J. M., Kim, E., Kononova, O., Ceder, G., Han, T. Y.-J., and Hiszpanski, A. M.  Data-driven materials research enabled by natural language processing and information extraction.  _Applied Physics Reviews_ , 7(4), 2020.
  * Rupnow et al. (2023) Rupnow, C. C., MacLeod, B. P., Mokhtari, M., Ocean, K., Dettelbach, K. E., Lin, D., Parlane, F. G., Chiu, H. N., Rooney, M. B., Waizenegger, C. E., et al.  A self-driving laboratory optimizes a scalable process for making functional coatings.  _Cell Reports Physical Science_ , 4(5), 2023.
  * Sim et al. (2023) Sim, M., Vakili, M. G., Strieth-Kalthoff, F., Hao, H., Hickman, R., Miret, S., Pablo-García, S., and Aspuru-Guzik, A.  Chemos 2.0: an orchestration architecture for chemical self-driving laboratories.  2023\.
  * Song et al. (2023a) Song, Y., Miret, S., and Liu, B.  MatSci-NLP: Evaluating scientific language models on materials science language tasks using text-to-schema modeling.  In Rogers, A., Boyd-Graber, J., and Okazaki, N. (eds.), _Proceedings of the 61st Annual Meeting of the Association for Computational Linguistics (Volume 1: Long Papers)_ , pp. 3621–3639, Toronto, Canada, July 2023a. Association for Computational Linguistics.  doi: 10.18653/v1/2023.acl-long.201.  URL https://aclanthology.org/2023.acl-long.201.
  * Song et al. (2023b) Song, Y., Miret, S., Zhang, H., and Liu, B.  Honeybee: Progressive instruction finetuning of large language models for materials science.  In _Findings of the Association for Computational Linguistics: EMNLP 2023_ , pp. 5724–5739, 2023b.
  * Touvron et al. (2023) Touvron, H., Martin, L., Stone, K., Albert, P., Almahairi, A., Babaei, Y., Bashlykov, N., Batra, S., Bhargava, P., Bhosale, S., et al.  Llama 2: Open foundation and fine-tuned chat models.  _arXiv preprint arXiv:2307.09288_ , 2023.
  * Vasudevan et al. (2022) Vasudevan, R. K., Orozco, E., and Kalinin, S. V.  Discovering mechanisms for materials microstructure optimization via reinforcement learning of a generative model.  _Machine Learning: Science and Technology_ , 3(4):04LT03, 2022.
  * Walker et al. (2021) Walker, N., Trewartha, A., Huo, H., Lee, S., Cruse, K., Dagdelen, J., Dunn, A., Persson, K., Ceder, G., and Jain, A.  The impact of domain-specific pre-training on named entity recognition tasks in materials science.  _Available at SSRN 3950755_ , 2021.
  * Wei et al. (2022) Wei, J., Wang, X., Schuurmans, D., Bosma, M., Xia, F., Chi, E., Le, Q. V., Zhou, D., et al.  Chain-of-thought prompting elicits reasoning in large language models.  _Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems_ , 35:24824–24837, 2022.
  * White et al. (2023) White, A. D., Hocky, G. M., Gandhi, H. A., Ansari, M., Cox, S., Wellawatte, G. P., Sasmal, S., Yang, Z., Liu, K., Singh, Y., et al.  Assessment of chemistry knowledge in large language models that generate code.  _Digital Discovery_ , 2(2):368–376, 2023.
  * Wu et al. (2023a) Wu, S., Irsoy, O., Lu, S., Dabravolski, V., Dredze, M., Gehrmann, S., Kambadur, P., Rosenberg, D., and Mann, G.  Bloomberggpt: A large language model for finance.  _arXiv preprint arXiv:2303.17564_ , 2023a.
  * Wu et al. (2023b) Wu, Y., Jia, F., Zhang, S., Wu, Q., Li, H., Zhu, E., Wang, Y., Lee, Y. T., Peng, R., and Wang, C.  An empirical study on challenging math problem solving with gpt-4.  _arXiv preprint arXiv:2306.01337_ , 2023b.
  * Xie et al. (2021) Xie, T., Fu, X., Ganea, O.-E., Barzilay, R., and Jaakkola, T.  Crystal diffusion variational autoencoder for periodic material generation.  _arXiv preprint arXiv:2110.06197_ , 2021.
  * Xie et al. (2023) Xie, T., Wan, Y., Huang, W., Yin, Z., Liu, Y., Wang, S., Linghu, Q., Kit, C., Grazian, C., Zhang, W., et al.  Darwin series: Domain specific large language models for natural science.  _arXiv preprint arXiv:2308.13565_ , 2023.
  * Xu et al. (2023) Xu, M., Yuan, X., Miret, S., and Tang, J.  Protst: Multi-modality learning of protein sequences and biomedical texts.  _arXiv preprint arXiv:2301.12040_ , 2023.
  * Yoshikawa et al. (2023) Yoshikawa, N., Skreta, M., Darvish, K., Arellano-Rubach, S., Ji, Z., Bjørn Kristensen, L., Li, A. Z., Zhao, Y., Xu, H., Kuramshin, A., et al.  Large language models for chemistry robotics.  _Autonomous Robots_ , 47(8):1057–1086, 2023.
  * Zaki et al. (2024) Zaki, M., Jayadeva, J., Mausam, M., and Krishnan, N. A.  Mascqa: Investigating materials science knowledge of large language models.  _Digital Discovery_ , 2024.
  * Zan et al. (2023) Zan, D., Chen, B., Zhang, F., Lu, D., Wu, B., Guan, B., Yongji, W., and Lou, J.-G.  Large language models meet nl2code: A survey.  In _Proceedings of the 61st Annual Meeting of the Association for Computational Linguistics (Volume 1: Long Papers)_ , pp. 7443–7464, 2023.
  * Zeni et al. (2023) Zeni, C., Pinsler, R., Zügner, D., Fowler, A., Horton, M., Fu, X., Shysheya, S., Crabbé, J., Sun, L., Smith, J., et al.  Mattergen: a generative model for inorganic materials design.  _arXiv preprint arXiv:2312.03687_ , 2023.
  * Zhang et al. (2023) Zhang, C., Zhang, C., Zhang, M., and Kweon, I. S.  Text-to-image diffusion model in generative ai: A survey.  _arXiv preprint arXiv:2303.07909_ , 2023.
  * Zhao & Cole (2022) Zhao, J. and Cole, J. M.  A database of refractive indices and dielectric constants auto-generated using chemdataextractor.  _Scientific data_ , 9(1):192, 2022.
  * Zhao et al. (2023) Zhao, J., Huang, S., and Cole, J. M.  Opticalbert and opticaltable-sqa: Text-and table-based language models for the optical-materials domain.  _Journal of Chemical Information and Modeling_ , 63(7):1961–1981, 2023.

##  Appendix A Crystal Information File of Silicon

The following represents a CIF document of silicon atom. The meta data
includes the source based on which the CIF is developed, that is, the journal
publication details including author names, title of the paper, journal, vol,
year and pages. Further, the complete lattice parameters are also included in
the file. data_global
_chemical_name_mineral ’Silicon’
loop_
_publ_author_name
’Kasper J S’
’Richards S M’
_journal_name_full ’Acta Crystallographica’
_journal_volume 17
_journal_year 1964
_journal_page_first 752
_journal_page_last 755
_publ_section_title
;
The crystal structures of new forms of silicon and germanium
;
_database_code_amcsd 0009282
_chemical_compound_source ’Synthetic’
_chemical_formula_sum ’Si’
_cell_length_a 6.636
_cell_length_b 6.636
_cell_length_c 6.636
_cell_angle_alpha 90
_cell_angle_beta 90
_cell_angle_gamma 90
_cell_volume 292.226
_exptl_crystal_density_diffrn 2.553
_symmetry_space_group_name_H-M ’I a 3’
loop_
_space_group_symop_operation_xyz
’x,y,z’
’1/2+x,1/2+y,1/2+z’
’1/2+z,x,1/2-y’
’+z,1/2+x,-y’
’1/2+z,-x,y’
’+z,1/2-x,1/2+y’
’-z,x,1/2+y’
’1/2-z,1/2+x,+y’
’-z,-x,-y’
’1/2-z,1/2-x,1/2-y’
’1/2+y,1/2-z,-x’
’+y,-z,1/2-x’
’-y,1/2-z,x’
’1/2-y,-z,1/2+x’
’1/2-y,z,-x’
’-y,1/2+z,1/2-x’
’y,z,x’
’1/2+y,1/2+z,1/2+x’
’x,1/2-y,1/2+z’
’1/2+x,-y,+z’
’-x,y,1/2+z’
’1/2-x,1/2+y,+z’
’x,1/2+y,-z’
’1/2+x,+y,1/2-z’
’-x,-y,-z’
’1/2-x,1/2-y,1/2-z’
’1/2-z,-x,1/2+y’
’-z,1/2-x,+y’
’1/2-z,x,-y’
’-z,1/2+x,1/2-y’
’z,-x,1/2-y’
’1/2+z,1/2-x,-y’
’z,x,y’
’1/2+z,1/2+x,1/2+y’
’1/2-y,1/2+z,x’
’-y,+z,1/2+x’
’y,1/2+z,-x’
’1/2+y,+z,1/2-x’
’1/2+y,-z,x’
’+y,1/2-z,1/2+x’
’-y,-z,-x’
’1/2-y,1/2-z,1/2-x’
’-x,1/2+y,1/2-z’
’1/2-x,+y,-z’
’x,-y,1/2-z’
’1/2+x,1/2-y,-z’
’-x,1/2-y,z’
’1/2-x,-y,1/2+z’
loop_
_atom_site_label
_atom_site_fract_x
_atom_site_fract_y
_atom_site_fract_z
_atom_site_U_iso_or_equiv
Si 0.10030 0.10030 0.10030 0.01127

##  Appendix B Mistakes in Q&A by GPT4-CoT

Following are some of the materials science questions where GPT4-CoT gave
incorrect answers. We provide the detailed question and answer provided by the
GPT4-CoT, correct answer and the mistake in the solution (highlighted in red).

Question 1

The materials belonging to which one of the following crystal classes would be
both piezoelectric and ferroelectric: (A) 222 (B) 4mm (C) -1 (D) 2/m

Correct: B, GPT4-CoT: D

Solution by GPT4-CoT

To determine which crystal class would exhibit both piezoelectric and
ferroelectric properties, we need to understand the properties of each class
and the criteria for displaying piezoelectric and ferroelectric behavior.

Piezoelectric materials: These materials generate an electrical charge when
subjected to mechanical stress or strain. For a material to be piezoelectric,
it must not have a center of symmetry (also called a center of inversion). In
other words, it should belong to a non-centrosymmetric crystal class.

Ferroelectric materials: These materials possess a spontaneous electric
polarization that can be reversed by an external electric field. Ferroelectric
materials must also lack a center of symmetry and fall within a polar crystal
class, meaning they have a unique polar axis.

Now, we can evaluate each crystal class:

(A) 222: This crystal class has a center of symmetry, so it cannot be either
piezoelectric or ferroelectric.

(B) 4mm: This crystal class does not have a center of symmetry, which means it
can be piezoelectric. However, it is non-polar, meaning it cannot be
ferroelectric.

(C) -1: This crystal class has a center of symmetry, so it cannot be either
piezoelectric or ferroelectric.

(D) 2/m: This crystal class does not have a center of symmetry, which means it
can be piezoelectric. Additionally, it is a polar crystal class, making it
able to be ferroelectric as well.

Thus, among these crystal classes, only class 2/m would be both piezoelectric
and ferroelectric.

The correct answer is: [D].

Correct solution.
2/m is centro-symmetric, and hence it is not polar. In contrast, 4mm point
group is polar.

Question 2 (Given: Universal gas constant, R = 8.31 J $mol^{-1}K^{-1}$,
Faraday’s constant, F = 96500 C $mol^{-1}$). A half cell consisting of pure Ni
immersed in an aqueous solution containing $Ni^{2+}$ ions of unknown
concentration, is galvanically coupled with another half cell consisting of
pure Cd immersed in a 1M aqueous solution of $Cd^{2+}$ ions. The temperature
is 25°C and pressure is 1 atm. The standard electrode reduction potentials of
Ni and Cd are -0.250 V and -0.403 V, respectively. The voltage of the cell is
found to be zero. The concentration(in micro molar) of $Ni^{2+}$ in the
solution is

Correct answer: 6 to 7.3, GPT4-CoT: 0

Solution by GPT4-CoT

Given the standard electrode reduction potentials of Ni and Cd are -0.250 V
and -0.403 V, respectively. The cell voltage is found to be zero, which means
the overall reaction is in equilibrium. We can use the Nernst equation to find
the concentration of $Ni^{2+}$ in the solution.

The Nernst equation is as follows:

$E=E^{0}-\frac{RT}{nF}\ln{Q}$

where, $E$ is the cell voltage, $E^{0}$ is the standard cell voltage, $R$ is
the universal gas constant, $T$ is the temperature in Kelvin, $n$ is the
number of moles of electrons transferred in the reaction, $F$ is Faraday’s
constant, and $Q$ is the reaction quotient.

Since the cell voltage is zero, the Nernst equation becomes:

$0=E_{Ni}^{0}-E_{Cd}^{0}-\frac{RT}{nF}\ln{Q}$

Before plugging in the known values, we need to convert the temperature to
Kelvin:

Temperature (T) = 25°C + 273.15 = 298.15 K

Now we can plug in the values:

$0=(-0.250)-(-0.403)-\frac{8.31\times 298.15}{2\times 96500}\ln{Q}$

$0=0.153-\frac{2.4685\times 10^{-4}}{2}\ln{Q}$

Solve for Q:

$\ln{Q}=\frac{0.153\times 2}{2.4685\times 10^{-4}}$

$\ln{Q}=1239.5083$

Take the exponent of both sides:

$Q=e^{1239.5083}$

Since the cell reaction is:

$Ni^{2+}+Cd\rightleftharpoons Ni+Cd^{2+}$

The reaction quotient Q is:

$Q=\frac{[Cd^{2+}]}{[Ni^{2+}]}$

Given that the concentration of $Cd^{2+}$ is 1M:

$1=\frac{[Cd^{2+}]}{[Ni^{2+}]}=\frac{1}{[Ni^{2+}]}$

Therefore, the concentration of $Ni^{2+}$ is:

$[Ni^{2+}]=\frac{1}{Q}=\frac{1}{e^{1239.5083}}$

Since the question is asking for the concentration in micro molar, we will
convert the concentration into micro molar:

$[Ni^{2+}]=\frac{1}{e^{1239.5083}}\times 10^{6}\,\mu M$

However, as the exponent in this case is too big (1239.5083) and practically
the answer is tending towards zero. So, the concentration would not have any
significant value and technically cannot be given explicitly. Therefore, the
answer comes out to be very close to 0 (approximately zero) and is negligibly
small.

Answer: [0]

Mistake made by GPT4-CoT

There’s a calculation error in the solution. The numerator in the highlighted
fraction should be $256.872\times 10^{-4}$ instead of $2.4685\times 10^{-4}$.

Correct Solution

The balanced equation for the reaction occurring in the cell is:

$Ni(s)+Cd^{2+}(aq)\xrightarrow{}Ni^{2+}(aq)+Cd(s)$

The standard cell potential can be calculated using the standard reduction
potentials of the half-reactions:

$E\textordmasculine_{cell}=E\textordmasculine_{Ni^{2+}/Ni}-E\textordmasculine_{Cd^{2+}/Cd}$

$E\textordmasculine_{cell}=(-0.250)-(-0.403)$

$E\textordmasculine_{cell}=0.153V$

The Nernst equation can be used to relate the measured cell potential, the
standard cell potential and the concentrations of the species involved in the
half-reactions:

$E_{cell}=E\textordmasculine_{cell}-\frac{RT}{nF}ln(Q)$

where Q is the reaction quotient and n is the number of electrons transferred
in the balanced equation. Since the cell potential is zero, we can simplify
the equation to:

$lnQ=\frac{nF}{RT}E\textordmasculine_{cell}$

For this particular cell, n = 2 because two electrons are transferred in the
balanced equation. The temperature is 25°C, so we can use R = 8.31
$Jmol^{-1}K^{-1}$ and F = 96500 $Cmol^{-1}$. Substituting these values and the
standard cell potential into the equation above, we get:

$lnQ=\frac{2\times 96500}{8.31\times 298}\times 0.153$

$lnQ=1.931$

$Q=e^{1.931}$

$Q=6.885$

Since the reaction quotient is equal to the concentration of $Ni^{2+}$ in the
solution, we can solve for the concentration:

$Q=\frac{[Ni^{2+}]}{[Cd^{2+}]}$

$6.885=\frac{[Ni^{2+}]}{1}$

$[Ni^{2+}]=6.885\mu M$

Therefore, the concentration of $Ni^{2+}$ in the solution is 6.885 $\mu M$.

Answer: [6.885]

Question 3

The Miller indices of the first three Bragg peaks in the X-ray diffraction
pattern obtained from a polycrystalline iron sample at room temperature are:
(A) (111), (200), (220) (B) (100), (110), (111) (C) (100), (110), (200) (D)
(110), (200), (220)

Correct Answer: D, GPT4-CoT: C

Solution by GPT4-CoT

To solve this problem, we first need to understand some key concepts:

Miller Indices (hkl): Miller indices are a notation system used in
crystallography to describe the orientation of crystallographic planes. They
are represented as (hkl) where h, k, and l are integers that are inversely
proportional to the intercepts of the planes with the lattice vectors.

Bragg’s Law: Bragg’s law describes the relationship between the angle of
incident X-rays, the crystal lattice spacing (d), and the order of reflection
(n) in X-ray diffraction. It is given by

$n\lambda=2d\sin\theta$

where $\lambda$ is the wavelength of X-rays, and $\theta$ is the angle between
the incident X-ray and the crystal plane.

For Bragg reflections, the interplanar spacing d depends on the crystal
structure and Miller indices. In the case of Iron (Fe), the crystal structure
is Body-Centered Cubic (BCC).

For BCC structure, the general formula for calculating d in terms of the
lattice parameter ’a’ and Miller indices is:

$\frac{1}{d^{2}}=\frac{(h^{2}+k^{2}+l^{2})}{a^{2}}$

For a given unit cell, the planes that have the lowest Miller indices and the
highest d-spacing will diffract X-rays first (lowest angle, n=1). So, we need
to find the first three Bragg peaks for Fe, which means identifying the three
lowest Miller indices sets.

By systematically listing all possible combinations of h, k, and l, and
identifying those that satisfy the BCC selection rule (h + k + l = even), we
get the following allowable Miller indices as:

(100), (110), and (200)

Now, we can rank these by their d-spacing. Based on the formula for d in BCC
structure:

$\frac{1}{d^{2}}=\frac{(h^{2}+k^{2}+l^{2})}{a^{2}}$

The magnitudes of the squared Miller indices $(h^{2}+k^{2}+l^{2})$ for these
combinations are:

$(100)\xrightarrow{}1^{2}+0^{2}+0^{2}=1$

$(110)\xrightarrow{}1^{2}+1^{2}+0^{2}=2$

$(200)\xrightarrow{}2^{2}+0^{2}+0^{2}=4$

Now, we can order these combinations by their magnitudes:

$(100)<(110)<(200)$

Since lower indices correspond to higher d-spacing and occur first in the
diffraction pattern, the first three Bragg peaks will have Miller indices:

$(100),(110),and(200)$

Thus, the correct answer is:

(C) (100), (110), (200)

Mistake made by GPT4

In the highlighted text, $(1+0+0)$ is not even. Hence, BCC should be ruled
out.

Question 4

Which of the following statement(s) is/are true: (i) All piezoelectric
materials are necessarily ferroelectric (ii) All ferroelectric materials are
necessarily piezoelectric (iii) All pyroelectric materials are necessarily
piezoelectric (iv) All pyroelectric materials are necessarily ferroelectric

(A) (i) and (ii) (B) (ii) and (iii) (C) (i) and (iv) (D) (ii) and (iv)

Correct answer: B, GPT-4-COT: D

Solution by GPT4-CoT

To answer this question, we must first understand the definitions of
piezoelectric, ferroelectric, and pyroelectric materials.

Piezoelectric materials: These materials exhibit an electrical response when
subjected to mechanical stress, and vice versa. The piezoelectric effect is
observed in certain crystals, ceramics, and polymers.

Ferroelectric materials: These materials have a spontaneous electric
polarization that can be reversed by applying an external electric field. This
property is due to the presence of domains with different orientations of
polarization in the materials.

Pyroelectric materials: These materials generate an electric charge when
heated or cooled, i.e., they exhibit a temperature-dependent polarization.
Conversely, they can display a temperature change when an electric field is
applied.

Now, let’s analyze each statement.

(i) All piezoelectric materials are necessarily ferroelectric:

This statement is not true. While all ferroelectric materials are
piezoelectric, not all piezoelectric materials are ferroelectric. Some
piezoelectric materials may not have the property of ferroelectricity, i.e.,
the spontaneous polarization that can be reversed using an electric field.

(ii) All ferroelectric materials are necessarily piezoelectric:

This statement is true. In ferroelectric materials, the electric polarization
can be reversed by an electric field, which causes a change in the arrangement
of positively and negatively charged ions. This shift in the electric dipoles
also results in an electric response when subjected to mechanical stress,
which makes ferroelectric materials piezoelectric.

(iii) All pyroelectric materials are necessarily piezoelectric:

This statement is not true. Pyroelectric materials exhibit temperature-
dependent polarization, but they might not exhibit the direct piezoelectric
effect (an electrical response to mechanical stress or vice versa). While some
pyroelectric materials are also piezoelectric, it is not necessarily true for
all pyroelectric materials.

(iv) All pyroelectric materials are necessarily ferroelectric:

This statement is true. The pyroelectric effect occurs due to the presence of
domains with different orientations of polarization, which is a characteristic
property of ferroelectric materials. When heated or cooled, the domains in
pyroelectric materials shift, causing a change in their electric field. Thus,
all pyroelectric materials are ferroelectric.

In conclusion, the correct answer is (D) (ii) and (iv).

Mistakes made by GPT4

All pyroelectric materials are necessarily ferroelectric” is incorrect. While
all ferroelectric materials are pyroelectric, vice-versa is incorrect.

Question 5

For a binary system at constant pressure, there are two types of invariant
reactions: (i) $\alpha\leftrightarrow\beta+\\\ gamma$ (ii)
$\alpha+\beta\leftrightarrow\gamma$ Analogously, how many different types of
invariant reactions may exist under variable temperature and pressure, for a
binary system?

(A) 1 (B) 2 (C) 3 (D) 4

Correct : C, GPT-4-COT: B

Solution by GPT4-CoT

To find the number of different types of invariant reactions under variable
temperature and pressure for a binary system, let’s first analyze the
difference between constant pressure and variable pressure and temperature
systems.

1\. Constant pressure: In this case, P is fixed, and we have one degree of
freedom (F = 1). According to the Gibbs phase rule, F = C - P + 2, where C is
the number of components and P is the number of phases. Thus, for a binary
system, C = 2.

Under constant pressure, we can have two types of invariant reactions:

(i) $\alpha\xleftrightarrow{}\beta+\gamma$: In this case, there are 3 phases
(P = 3), and substituting in the Gibbs phase rule, we get F = 2 - 3 + 2 = 1.
Hence, this is a valid reaction for constant pressure.

(ii) $\alpha+\beta\xleftrightarrow{}\gamma$: In this case, there are 2 phases
(P = 2), and substituting in the Gibbs phase rule, we get F = 2 - 2 + 2 = 2.
This is not an invariant reaction under constant pressure, as we have one
extra degree of freedom.

2\. Variable temperature and pressure: Now, we have two degrees of freedom (F
= 2).

Let’s analyze the given reaction types for the variable temperature and
pressure:

(i) $\alpha\xleftrightarrow{}\beta+\gamma$: There are 3 phases (P = 3).
Substituting in the Gibbs phase rule, F = 2 - 3 + 2 = 1. This is not an
invariant reaction under variable temperature and pressure, as we lack one
degree of freedom.

(ii) $\alpha+\beta\xleftrightarrow{}\gamma$: There are 2 phases (P = 2).
Substituting in the Gibbs phase rule, F = 2 - 2 + 2 = 2. This is a valid
invariant reaction under variable temperature and pressure.

Let’s now check if there exist any other types of invariant reactions with F =
2:

(iii) $\alpha\xleftrightarrow{}\beta$: There are 2 phases (P = 2).
Substituting in the Gibbs phase rule, F = 2 - 2 + 2 = 2. This is a valid
invariant reaction under variable temperature and pressure.

(iv) $\alpha+\beta+\gamma\xleftrightarrow{}$ None: There are no phases (P =
0). Substituting in the Gibbs phase rule, F = 2 - 0 + 2 = 4. This is not an
invariant reaction under variable temperature and pressure, as we have two
extra degrees of freedom.

Hence, there are two different types of invariant reactions that may exist
under variable temperature and pressure for a binary system:
$\alpha+\beta\xleftrightarrow{}\gamma$ and $\alpha\xleftrightarrow{}\beta$.

So, the answer is (B) 2.

Correct explanation:

Under variable temperature and pressure, there can be up to three types of
invariant reactions for a binary system.

To understand why, we need to consider the phase rule, which relates the
number of degrees of freedom to the number of phases and components in a
system:

$F=C-P+2$

where F is the number of degrees of freedom, C is the number of components,
and P is the number of phases.

For a binary system (C = 2) with two phases ($\alpha$ and $\beta$), the phase
rule becomes:

$F=2-2+2=2$

This means that we can vary two intensive variables (such as T and P) while
still maintaining the system invariant, i.e. at a fixed composition and with
two coexisting phases.

Now, let’s consider the possible reactions that can occur in this system:

\- Reaction (i) $\alpha\leftrightarrow\beta+\gamma$ involves one component
(the other is a product of the reaction) and two phases. This means that it
will be an invariant reaction at a certain T and P, but as we vary T and P,
the reaction may become non-invariant because it will no longer be possible to
have all three phases ($\alpha,\beta$ and $\gamma$) coexisting. Therefore, we
can say that there is at least one type of invariant reaction under variable T
and P.

\- Reaction (ii) $\alpha+\beta\xleftrightarrow{}\gamma$ involves both
components of the system and two phases. Similarly, this may be an invariant
reaction at certain conditions, but may become non-invariant as we vary T and
P. Therefore, we can say that there is potentially another type of invariant
reaction, but it depends on the system parameters.

\- Finally, there could be a reaction that involves both components and all
three phases, e.g. $\alpha+\beta\xleftrightarrow{}\gamma+\delta$. In this
case, the phase rule becomes:

$F=2-3+2=1$

which means that only one intensive variable can be varied while keeping the
system invariant. Therefore, this reaction could be invariant under variable T
and P, depending on the specific values of T and P.

In summary, there can be up to three types of invariant reactions under
variable T and P, but the exact number depends on the system parameters.
Therefore, the correct answer is (C) 3.

Question 6

The best magnetostrictive material is

(A) $Nd_{2}Fe_{14}B$ (B) $Fe_{3}O_{4}$ (C) $Cu_{2}MnAl$ (D) $ZnFe_{2}O_{4}$

Correct: A, GPT-4-CoT: C

Solution by GPT-4-CoT

Magnetostriction is the property of a material to change its shape or
dimensions in the presence of a magnetic field. The magnetostrictive materials
are widely used in sensors, actuators, and other applications where a change
in dimension due to magnetic fields is needed. The best magnetostrictive
material is characterized by high magnetostriction, high sensitivity to
magnetic fields, and low losses.

Now let’s look at the given options:

(A) $Nd_{2}Fe_{14}B$ \- Neodymium Iron Boron is well-known for its high energy
product and strong magnetic properties. It is used in permanent magnets and
serves a wide variety of applications. However, its magnetostrictive
properties are not strong.

(B) $Fe_{3}O_{4}$ \- Magnetite, or Iron (II, III) Oxide, is a ferrimagnetic
material, which means it has both ferromagnetic and antiferromagnetic
properties. Magnetite exhibits good magnetostrictive properties, but there
exist materials that show better magnetostriction.

(C) $Cu_{2}MnAl$ \- Copper Manganese Aluminum, also known as Heusler alloy or
Cu-Al-Mn alloy, shows strong magnetostrictive properties, and is among the
best magnetostrictive alloys. Its high magnetostriction and low losses make it
a suitable material for applications involving dimensional changes due to
magnetic fields.

(D) $ZnFe_{2}O_{4}$ \- Zinc Iron Oxide, or Zinc Ferrite, is a spinel ferrite
material, which is also used in certain applications where magnetostriction is
required. It has some magnetostrictive properties but not as strong as Cu-Al-
Mn alloy.

Based on the above information, the correct answer is:

[Option (C) $Cu_{2}MnAl$]

Question 7

With reference to the stress intensity factor, find the correct match of
nomenclature (Column A) with the mode of deformation applied to the crack
(Column B).

Column A: [(P) Mode I, (Q) Mode II, (R) Mode III]

COlumn B: [(X) Forward shear mode, (Y) Parallel shear mode, (Z) Crack opening
mode ]

Options: (A) P - Z, Q - Y, R - X (B) P - Z, Q - X, R - Y (C) P - Y, Q - X, R -
Z (D) P - Y, Q - Z, R – X

Correct: B, GPT4-CoT: A

Solution by GPT4-CoT

The stress intensity factor is a measure of the stress field near the tip of a
crack, which is critical for determining the fracture behavior of a material.
There are three modes of deformation applied to a crack, and they are defined
as follows:

1\. Mode I: Crack opening mode - This mode involves the opening of the crack
faces perpendicular to the direction of crack growth. The stress applied in
this mode is tensile stress, and it acts normal to the plane of the crack.

2\. Mode II: Forward shear mode - In this mode, the crack faces slide against
each other in the direction of crack growth. The stress applied in this mode
is shear stress, and it acts parallel to both the plane of the crack and the
direction of crack growth.

3\. Mode III: Parallel shear mode - This mode is also characterized by the
sliding of crack faces against each other. However, the stress applied in this
mode is shear stress that acts parallel to the plane of the crack but
perpendicular to the direction of crack growth.

Now, let’s match the nomenclature (Column A) with the mode of deformation
applied to the crack (Column B):

(P) Mode I - (Z) Crack opening mode: The stress intensity factor in Mode I
corresponds to the crack opening mode (opening of the crack faces
perpendicular to the direction of crack growth).

(Q) Mode II - (X) Forward shear mode: The stress intensity factor in Mode II
corresponds to the forward shear mode (sliding of crack faces in the direction
of crack growth).

(R) Mode III - (Y) Parallel shear mode: The stress intensity factor in Mode
III corresponds to the parallel shear mode (sliding of crack faces
perpendicular to the direction of crack growth).

So, the correct option is:

(A) P - Z, Q - Y, R – X

Question 8

Which one of the following modern practices is used for retarding the solution
loss reaction in blast furnace ironmaking?

(A) High top pressure (B) Bell-less top (C) Pulverized coal injection (D)
Rotating chute for burden distribution

Correct: A, GPT4-CoT: B

Solution by GPT4-CoT

In blast furnace ironmaking, the primary objective is to reduce the iron oxide
present in the raw material to metallic iron, along with producing slag and
off-gases. However, various factors can lead to the solution loss reaction,
where the reduction of iron oxide is not as efficient, and there is a loss of
valuable materials. It is essential to employ modern practices to minimize
these losses and improve the overall efficiency of the process.

Let’s analyze each option given:

(A) High top pressure:

High top pressure increases the pressure inside the blast furnace, improving
the gas-solid contact and enhancing the reduction reactions of iron oxide.
However, this method is more focused on improving the indirect reduction, and
its effect on retarding the solution loss reaction is secondary in nature.

(B) Bell-less top:

The bell-less top is a type of charging system used in a blast furnace. It
allows for better distribution of raw materials (burden) in the furnace,
reducing the solution loss reaction. It consists of a rotating mechanism that
distributes the burden material evenly and helps in controlling the gas flow
in the furnace. By minimizing channeling and improving the gas-solid contact,
this system significantly reduces the solution loss reaction.

(C) Pulverized coal injection (PCI):

Pulverized coal injection involves injecting fine coal particles into the
blast furnace as a replacement for some of the coke required in the process.
PCI helps in reducing the coke consumption and, subsequently, the costs
associated. It also improves the overall energy efficiency of the furnace.
However, its primary impact is on the coke consumption and not directly on the
solution loss reaction.

(D) Rotating chute for burden distribution:

A rotating chute is another method of burden distribution in the blast
furnace. Its purpose is similar to the bell-less top, i.e., to distribute the
raw materials evenly to ensure proper gas-solid contact and prevent
channeling. By doing so, it can help in retarding the solution loss reaction.

In conclusion, among the given modern practices, the one that is primarily
used for retarding the solution loss reaction in blast furnace ironmaking is:

Answer: (B) Bell-less top

Question 9

In the absence of any external stress, which one of the following statements
related to the interaction of point defect and a dislocation is FALSE:

(A) An oversized solute atom would preferentially migrate below the slip plane
of an edge dislocation (B) A spherically symmetric point defect can interact
with both the hydrostatic and shear stress fields of a dislocation (C) A point
defect can locally modify the elastic modulus and thereby can change the
interaction energy. (D) Vacancies are attracted towards the compressive region
of dislocation

Correct: B, GPT4-CoT: D

Solution by GPT4-CoT

Let’s analyze each statement one by one:

(A) An oversized solute atom would preferentially migrate below the slip plane
of an edge dislocation.

This statement is TRUE. An oversized solute atom is larger than the host atoms
in the crystal structure. When an oversized solute atom is present near an
edge dislocation, it experiences a lower energy state by moving to the larger
space created below the slip plane. The presence of the larger solute in this
region reduces the elastic strain energy of the dislocation, which makes this
configuration favorable.

(B) A spherically symmetric point defect can interact with both the
hydrostatic and shear stress fields of a dislocation.

This statement is TRUE. A spherically symmetric point defect, such as a
vacancy or an interstitial atom, can interact with both the hydrostatic
(volume-changing) and shear (shape-changing) stress fields of a dislocation.
The spherical symmetry of the point defect allows it to create a disturbance
in both the hydrostatic and shear stress components present around the
dislocation, which results in an interaction between the point defect and the
dislocation.

(C) A point defect can locally modify the elastic modulus and thereby can
change the interaction energy.

This statement is TRUE. A point defect creates a local disturbance in the
crystal lattice, which affects the elastic modulus in its vicinity. A change
in the elastic modulus can alter the interaction energy between the point
defect and the dislocation. This change in interaction energy can have an
influence on the dislocation motion, either promoting or hindering it.

(D) Vacancies are attracted towards the compressive region of dislocation.

This statement is FALSE. Vacancies are actually attracted towards the tensile
region of the dislocation, where the lattice is under tension and the
interatomic spacing is larger. A vacancy feels a lower energy state in the
tensile region, as it relieves some of the tensile stress by filling the
enlarged interstitial spaces. This attraction of vacancies to the tensile
region can help the dislocation motion by allowing atoms to easily ”jump” into
the vacancies, thereby promoting slip.

Therefore, the correct answer is [D].

Question 10

Critical value of the Gibbs energy of nucleation at equilibrium temperature is

(A) zero (B) infinite (C) positive (D) negative

Correct: B, GPT4-CoT: D

Solution by GPT4-CoT

To answer this question, we need to understand the concept of Gibbs energy and
how it relates to nucleation.

Gibbs energy (also called Gibbs free energy) is a thermodynamic potential that
measures the maximum reversible work that may be performed by a system at a
constant temperature and pressure. It is represented by G and defined as:

G = H - TS

where H is the enthalpy, T is the temperature, and S is the entropy of the
system. In a phase transformation or nucleation process, the Gibbs energy
change ($\Delta G$) determines the thermodynamic driving force for the process
to occur.

Nucleation is the initial step in the phase transformation process where a new
phase (solid or liquid) forms within the existing phase (for example, when
water vapor condenses into liquid droplets during cloud formation). At
equilibrium, the nucleation rate is constant, which means there is a balance
between the formation of new nuclei and the dissolution of existing ones.

Now, let’s look at the different critical values of Gibbs energy of nucleation
at equilibrium temperature:

(A) Zero: If the Gibbs energy of nucleation is zero at equilibrium, it means
that there is no thermodynamic driving force for the nucleation process to
occur. The system is at its most stable state, and no phase transformation
will happen or is very slow.

(B) Infinite: The Gibbs energy of nucleation being infinite at equilibrium is
not thermodynamically possible since it would mean an infinite amount of work
is required for any nuclei to form. This contradicts the definition of Gibbs
energy, which measures the maximum reversible work that may be performed by a
system.

(C) Positive: A positive Gibbs energy of nucleation indicates that the system
is in a metastable state. While the nucleation process can still occur at this
state, the rate of nucleation is significantly lower than if $\Delta G$ were
negative. The system favours dissolution over nucleation, but a phase
transformation can still happen under certain conditions.

(D) Negative: A negative Gibbs energy of nucleation implies that the system is
in an unstable state and phase transformation is thermodynamically favoured.
At equilibrium, the formation of nuclei is energetically favorable, and the
nucleation process will spontaneously proceed.

In conclusion, at equilibrium temperature, the critical value of the Gibbs
energy of nucleation is:

Answer: [(D) negative]