pith. sign in

arxiv: 2606.24480 · v1 · pith:UASOKAI3new · submitted 2026-06-23 · ❄️ cond-mat.mtrl-sci

Breaking Bottlenecks in Solid Electrolyte Discovery with Large Artificial Intelligence Models

Eric Jianfeng Cheng , Min Hong , Zhiquan Zeng , Chuanyu Liu , Qian Wang , Melissa Jane Meadowcroft , Vlad Badilita , Carlos Miguel Costa
show 17 more authors
Senentxu Lanceros-M\'endez Ying Li Chenyao Ma Weibo Gong Surendra Martha Aloysius Soon Piao Ma Di Zhang Teguh Ariyanto Sudaryanto Hiroshi Kakinuma Jie Zhao Jiayu Peng Pengfei Ou Jun Lu Shin-ichi Orimo Hao Li
This is my paper

Pith reviewed 2026-06-25 22:46 UTC · model grok-4.3

classification ❄️ cond-mat.mtrl-sci
keywords solid electrolytesmachine learning interatomic potentialslarge language modelsautonomous materials discoveryclosed-loop AIion transportbattery interfacesmultiscale simulation
0
0 comments X

The pith

Large AI models enable closed-loop autonomous discovery of solid electrolytes by integrating ML interatomic potentials and language models.

A machine-rendered reading of the paper's core claim, the machinery that carries it, and where it could break.

The paper sets out a framework in which machine learning interatomic potentials and large language models together remove the main barriers to solid-electrolyte discovery: scattered data, slow simulation transfer, and manual experimental loops. It argues that these models can turn static databases into live knowledge systems that propose candidates, run multiscale simulations, quantify uncertainty, and feed results back into the next round of design. The shift matters because solid electrolytes must satisfy bulk ion transport, mechanical strength, and interface stability at once, a combination that defeats intuition-led searches. If the framework works, research moves from isolated trials to continuous, self-correcting cycles that shorten the time from hypothesis to validated material.

Core claim

The authors claim that a closed-loop architecture combining AI-driven candidate generation, multiscale simulation via MLIPs, uncertainty-aware selection, and experimental validation can convert solid-electrolyte research from intuition-guided exploration into data-informed, self-improving cycles, with LLMs supplying literature synthesis and hypothesis generation.

What carries the argument

The closed-loop architecture that links AI candidate design, MLIP-enabled multiscale simulation, uncertainty quantification, and experimental feedback into a single self-updating system.

If this is right

  • MLIPs extend DFT accuracy to the long timescales needed for realistic ion-migration studies.
  • LLMs extract patterns from the literature and generate testable hypotheses without manual curation.
  • Static materials databases evolve into dynamic systems that incorporate new simulation and experimental results automatically.
  • Autonomous laboratories become feasible once the AI loop is coupled to robotic synthesis and characterization.

Where Pith is reading between the lines

These are editorial extensions of the paper, not claims the author makes directly.

  • The same loop structure could be applied to electrode or interface materials once comparable standardized datasets exist.
  • Reproducibility problems may require shared experimental protocols and uncertainty reporting before the loop can close reliably.
  • Success would still depend on hardware advances that allow rapid, low-cost validation of AI-selected compositions.

Load-bearing premise

The practical obstacles of data standardization, interfacial complexity, and experimental reproducibility can be overcome enough for the closed-loop AI system to operate continuously.

What would settle it

A controlled test in which AI-proposed electrolyte candidates show no measurable improvement in discovery rate or performance metrics over a matched set of human-designed candidates run through the same experimental pipeline.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 2606.24480 by Aloysius Soon, Carlos Miguel Costa, Chenyao Ma, Chuanyu Liu, Di Zhang, Eric Jianfeng Cheng, Hao Li, Hiroshi Kakinuma, Jiayu Peng, Jie Zhao, Jun Lu, Melissa Jane Meadowcroft, Min Hong, Pengfei Ou, Piao Ma, Qian Wang, Senentxu Lanceros-M\'endez, Shin-ichi Orimo, Sudaryanto, Surendra Martha, Teguh Ariyanto, Vlad Badilita, Weibo Gong, Ying Li, Zhiquan Zeng.

Figure 1
Figure 1. Figure 1: Rationale and roadmap for autonomous SE discovery. [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p006_1.png] view at source ↗
Figure 2
Figure 2. Figure 2: Data integration-enabled materials discovery in SEs. [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p015_2.png] view at source ↗
Figure 3
Figure 3. Figure 3: Multi-scale modeling and validation of SEs. (a) General hierarchical framework illustrating the spatiotemporal bridging by MLIPs. High-fidelity DFT data enables initial training,[107] while active learning loops identify uncertain configurations for continuous self-refinement. MLIPs achieve quantum accuracy at classical speeds, [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p024_3.png] view at source ↗
Figure 4
Figure 4. Figure 4: LLM-enabled workflows for SE discovery. (a) Author-designed framework linking extraction systems, reasoning systems, and execution systems through feedback. Extraction systems normalize evidence and audit literature-derived errors; reasoning systems convert structured evidence into validation-aware proposals; execution systems connect agents, tools, and computational or experimental modules. (b) Conductivi… view at source ↗
Figure 5
Figure 5. Figure 5: Closed-loop intelligent SE discovery. Upper row: ML/HPC-guided discovery of inorganic SEs. (a) Large-scale screening funnel used to narrow the candidate space by stability, electronic, electrochemical, diffusivity, cost, mechanical, and density filters. (b) Diffusivity-based screening of 583 candidates using Li self-diffusivity at 800 and 1200 K, grouped by anion type. (c) Experimental validation of the NL… view at source ↗
Figure 6
Figure 6. Figure 6: Outlook toward autonomous SE laboratories. The schematic shows a closed￾loop AI-agent framework that integrates literature, databases, simulations, and experiments to guide SE design. Through perception, learning, action, and reasoning, the AI agent enables iterative optimization of composition, structure, performance, and stability, supporting standardized data use, interface-aware modeling, and discovery… view at source ↗
read the original abstract

Solid electrolytes (SEs) are central to next-generation metal batteries, yet their discovery remains constrained by fragmented data, limited transferability of simulations, and slow experimental iteration. Unlike catalysis, where surface reactivity dominates, SEs require simultaneous optimization of bulk ion transport, defect chemistry, mechanical integrity, and interfacial stability. Here, we outline a framework for autonomous SE discovery enabled by large artificial intelligence (AI) models, including machine learning interatomic potentials (MLIPs) and large language models (LLMs). We discuss the evolution from static materials databases to dynamic, self-updating knowledge systems, the role of MLIPs in bridging density functional theory (DFT) and long-timescale ion migration, and the emergence of LLMs as engines for literature mining, hypothesis generation, and scientific reasoning. We further describe a closed-loop architecture integrating AI-driven candidate design, multiscale simulation, uncertainty-aware selection, and experimental validation. Such systems shift SE research from intuition-guided exploration to data-informed, self-improving cycles. We conclude by highlighting challenges in data standardization, interfacial complexity, and reproducibility, and we propose design principles for building autonomous laboratories for solid-state battery materials.

Editorial analysis

A structured set of objections, weighed in public.

Desk editor's note, referee report, simulated authors' rebuttal, and a circularity audit. Tearing a paper down is the easy half of reading it; the pith above is the substance, this is the friction.

Referee Report

1 major / 2 minor

Summary. The manuscript is a perspective article proposing a closed-loop AI framework for solid electrolyte (SE) discovery. It describes the use of machine learning interatomic potentials (MLIPs) to bridge DFT and long-timescale ion migration, large language models (LLMs) for literature mining and hypothesis generation, and an integrated architecture combining AI candidate design, multiscale simulation, uncertainty-aware selection, and experimental validation. The paper argues this approach can shift SE research from intuition-guided exploration to data-informed, self-improving cycles while identifying challenges in data standardization, interfacial complexity, and reproducibility and outlining design principles to address them.

Significance. If implemented, the proposed framework could meaningfully accelerate SE discovery by enabling systematic optimization across bulk transport, defects, mechanics, and interfaces in a manner not feasible with current fragmented approaches. The manuscript contributes by synthesizing roles for MLIPs and LLMs in a materials-specific context and by framing open challenges as addressable through deliberate design principles, offering a conceptual roadmap rather than new empirical results.

major comments (1)
  1. [Abstract] Abstract: the central claim that the outlined systems will shift SE research to 'data-informed, self-improving cycles' rests on the assumption that the listed challenges (data standardization, interfacial complexity, reproducibility) can be resolved sufficiently for the closed-loop architecture to function; the manuscript acknowledges these as open issues but provides no concrete design principles, pilot implementations, or quantitative feasibility assessment to support that they are surmountable within the proposed framework.
minor comments (2)
  1. The abstract and introduction would benefit from explicit citations to prior closed-loop AI efforts in related fields (e.g., catalysis or battery electrolytes) to better situate the novelty of the SE-specific proposal.
  2. Notation for key components (MLIPs, LLMs, closed-loop elements) is introduced at a high level; a short table or diagram defining their interfaces and data flows would improve clarity for readers outside the immediate subfield.

Simulated Author's Rebuttal

1 responses · 0 unresolved

We thank the referee for their positive evaluation of our perspective article and for highlighting its potential to accelerate solid electrolyte discovery. We address the single major comment below regarding the abstract.

read point-by-point responses

  1. Referee: [Abstract] Abstract: the central claim that the outlined systems will shift SE research to 'data-informed, self-improving cycles' rests on the assumption that the listed challenges (data standardization, interfacial complexity, reproducibility) can be resolved sufficiently for the closed-loop architecture to function; the manuscript acknowledges these as open issues but provides no concrete design principles, pilot implementations, or quantitative feasibility assessment to support that they are surmountable within the proposed framework.

    Authors: We agree that this is a perspective article rather than an empirical study and therefore contains no pilot implementations or quantitative feasibility assessments, which would lie outside its scope. The manuscript does propose design principles in its concluding section to address data standardization (e.g., via shared ontologies and uncertainty-aware data curation), interfacial complexity (e.g., via multiscale MLIP+LLM coupling), and reproducibility (e.g., via automated experimental logging and uncertainty quantification). These principles are framed conceptually as actionable steps toward making the challenges surmountable. To avoid any overstatement in the abstract, we will revise the final sentence to read: 'We conclude by highlighting challenges in data standardization, interfacial complexity, and reproducibility, and outline design principles intended to enable autonomous laboratories for solid-state battery materials.' This constitutes a minor textual clarification. revision: yes

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged

No significant circularity identified

full rationale

The manuscript is a perspective paper outlining a high-level framework for AI-enabled solid electrolyte discovery. It contains no mathematical derivations, equations, fitted parameters, predictions, or load-bearing claims that reduce to inputs by construction. All content is descriptive, discussing challenges and proposing design principles without any self-definitional, fitted-input, or self-citation chains that would trigger the enumerated circularity patterns. The central claim is aspirational and explicitly acknowledges open challenges, making the derivation chain self-contained with no internal reductions.

Axiom & Free-Parameter Ledger

0 free parameters · 0 axioms · 0 invented entities

Abstract-only review; no free parameters, axioms, or invented entities are identifiable from the provided text.

pith-pipeline@v0.9.1-grok · 5834 in / 1030 out tokens · 16032 ms · 2026-06-25T22:46:28.362734+00:00 · methodology

discussion (0)

Sign in with ORCID, Apple, or X to comment. Anyone can read and Pith papers without signing in.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

144 extracted references

  1. [1]

    E. J. Cheng, H. Duan, M. J. Wang, E. Kazyak, H. Munakata, R. Garcia-Mendez, B. Gao, H. Huo, T. Zhang, F. Chen, R. Inada, K. Miyazaki, S. Ohno, H. Kato, S. Orimo, V . Thangadurai, T. Abe, K. Kanamura, Energy Storage Mater . 2025, 75, 103970

    2025

  2. [2]

    Q. Wang, R. Sato, R. García-Méndez, W. Jang, P. Ou, A. Soon, J. Zhao, X. Wang, S. Orimo, E. J. Cheng, AI Agent 2025, 1, 10

    2025

  3. [3]

    Famprikis, P

    T. Famprikis, P. Canepa, J. A. Dawson, M. S. Islam, C. Masquelier, Nat. Mater. 2019, 18, 1278

    2019

  4. [4]

    Manthiram, X

    A. Manthiram, X. Yu, S. Wang, Nat. Rev. Mater. 2017, 2, 16103

    2017

  5. [5]

    E. J. Cheng, T. Yang, Y . Liu, L. Chai, R. Garcia-Mendez, E. Kazyak, Z. Fu, G. Luo, F. Chen, R. Inada, V . Badilita, H. Duan, Z. Wang, J. Qin, H. Li, S. Orimo, H. Kato, Mater. Today Energy 2024, 44, 101644

    2024

  6. [6]

    Shoji, E

    M. Shoji, E. J. Cheng, T. Kimura, K. Kanamura, J. Phys. Appl. Phys. 2019, 52, 103001

    2019

  7. [7]

    Q. Zhao, S. Stalin, C.-Z. Zhao, L. A. Archer, Nat. Rev. Mater. 2020, 5, 229

    2020

  8. [8]

    V . Raj, Y . Wang, M. Feng, K. G. Naik, M. Jain, B. S. Vishnugopi, S. Deng, N. B. Schorr, M. Salazar, A. M. Heusser, Nat. Mater. 2026, 25, 249

    2026

  9. [9]

    J. Wei, S. Deebansok, X. He, Q. Wang, T. Waritanant, Z. Geng, Y . Li, M. Gautam, G. Luo, Y . Zhang, H. Wang, X. Feng, H. Yamada, H. S. Kim, H. Kato, S. Orimo, K. Kanamura, V . Thangadurai, E. J. Cheng, Mater. Sci. Eng. R Rep. 2026, 170, 101211

    2026

  10. [10]

    J. B. Goodenough, K.-S. Park, J. Am. Chem. Soc. 2013, 135, 1167

    2013

  11. [11]

    M. Hong, Q. Dong, H. Xie, B. C. Clifford, J. Qian, X. Wang, J. Luo, L. Hu, ACS Energy Lett. 2021, 6, 3753

    2021

  12. [12]

    W. Zhao, J. Yi, P. He, H. Zhou, Electrochem. Energy Rev. 2019, 2, 574

    2019

  13. [13]

    X. Ji, S. Hou, P. Wang, X. He, N. Piao, J. Chen, X. Fan, C. Wang, Adv. Mater. 2020, 32, 2002741

    2020

  14. [14]

    C. Wang, J. T. Kim, C. Wang, X. Sun, Adv. Mater. 2023, 35, 2209074

    2023

  15. [15]

    E. J. Cheng, Y . Kushida, T. Abe, K. Kanamura, ACS Appl. Mater. Interfaces 2022, 14, 40881

    2022

  16. [16]

    E. J. Cheng, K. Nishikawa, T. Abe, K. Kanamura, Ionics 2022, 28, 5089

    2022

  17. [17]

    Wang, L.-J

    D. Wang, L.-J. Jhang, R. Kou, M. Liao, S. Zheng, H. Jiang, P. Shi, G.-X. Li, K. Meng, D. Wang, Nat. Commun. 2023, 14, 1895

    2023

  18. [18]

    C. Wang, K. Fu, S. P. Kammampata, D. W. McOwen, A. J. Samson, L. Zhang, G. T. Hitz, A. M. Nolan, E. D. Wachsman, Y . Mo, V . Thangadurai, L. Hu, Chem. Rev. 2020, 120, 4257

    2020

  19. [19]

    Huang, T

    X. Huang, T. Li, W. Fan, R. Xiao, X.-B. Cheng, Adv. Energy Mater. 2024, 14, 2303850

    2024

  20. [20]

    Y . Liao, X. Wang, H. Yuan, Y . Li, C. Xu, S. Li, J. Hu, S. Yang, F. Deng, J. Liu, J. Huang, Adv. Mater. 2025, 37, 2419782

    2025

  21. [21]

    X. Gao, Z. Xing, M. Wang, C. Nie, Z. Shang, Z. Bai, S. X. Dou, N. Wang, Energy Storage Mater . 2023, 60, 102821. 48

    2023

  22. [22]

    Y . Ma, Y . Qiu, K. Yang, S. Lv, Y . Li, X. An, G. Xiao, Z. Han, Y . Ma, L. Chen, D. Zhang, W. Lv, Y . Tian, T. Hou, M. Liu, Z. Zhou, F. Kang, Y .-B. He, Energy Environ. Sci. 2024, 17, 8274

    2024

  23. [23]

    L. Hu, J. Wang, K. Wang, Z. Gu, Z. Xi, H. Li, F. Chen, Y . Wang, Z. Li, C. Ma, Nat. Commun. 2023, 14, 3807

    2023

  24. [24]

    W. Yang, Y . Liu, X. Sun, Z. He, P. He, H. Zhou, Angew. Chem. Int. Ed. 2024, 63, e202401428

    2024

  25. [25]

    Y . Kato, S. Hori, T. Saito, K. Suzuki, M. Hirayama, A. Mitsui, M. Yonemura, H. Iba, R. Kanno, Nat. Energy 2016, 1, 16030

    2016

  26. [26]

    Tatsumisago, M

    M. Tatsumisago, M. Nagao, A. Hayashi, J. Asian Ceram. Soc. 2013, 1, 17

    2013

  27. [27]

    J. C. Bachman, S. Muy, A. Grimaud, H.-H. Chang, N. Pour, S. F. Lux, O. Paschos, F. Maglia, S. Lupart, P. Lamp, L. Giordano, Y . Shao-Horn, Chem. Rev. 2016, 116, 140

    2016

  28. [28]

    Muzakir, K

    M. Muzakir, K. Manickavasakam, E. J. Cheng, F. Yang, Z. Wang, H. Li, X. Zhang, J. Qin, J. Mater. Chem. A 2025, 13, 73

    2025

  29. [29]

    J. Qiu, X. Liu, R. Chen, Q. Li, Y . Wang, P. Chen, L. Gan, S. Lee, D. Nordlund, Y . Liu, X. Yu, X. Bai, H. Li, L. Chen, Adv. Funct. Mater . 2020, 30, 1909392

    2020

  30. [30]

    L. G. Balzat, R. Calaminus, Y . Zhao, K. Gjorgjevikj, I. Moudrakovski, S. Krause, A. Koeppe, B. Nestler, B. V . Lotsch, Angew. Chem. Int. Ed. 2026, e5778118

    2026

  31. [31]

    Randau, D

    S. Randau, D. A. Weber, O. Kötz, R. Koerver, P. Braun, A. Weber, E. Ivers-Tiffée, T. Adermann, J. Kulisch, W. G. Zeier, F. H. Richter, J. Janek, Nat. Energy 2020, 5, 259

    2020

  32. [32]

    E. O. Pyzer-Knapp, J. W. Pitera, P. W. J. Staar, S. Takeda, T. Laino, D. P. Sanders, J. Sexton, J. R. Smith, A. Curioni, Npj Comput. Mater. 2022, 8, 84

    2022

  33. [33]

    A. K. Cheetham, R. Seshadri, Chem. Mater. 2024, 36, 3490

    2024

  34. [34]

    Madika, A

    B. Madika, A. Saha, C. Kang, B. Buyantogtokh, J. Agar, C. M. Wolverton, P. V oorhees, P . Littlewood, S. Kalinin, S. Hong, ACS Nano 2025, 19, 27116

    2025

  35. [35]

    J. M. Gregoire, L. Zhou, J. A. Haber, Nat. Synth. 2023, 2, 493

    2023

  36. [37]

    E. J. Cheng, A. Sharafi, J. Sakamoto, Electrochimica Acta 2017, 223, 85

    2017

  37. [38]

    Y . Yang, S. Yang, X. Xue, X. Zhang, Q. Li, Y . Yao, X. Rui, H. Pan, Y . Yu, Adv. Mater . 2024, 36, 2308332

    2024

  38. [39]

    H. Wan, Z. Wang, W. Zhang, X. He, C. Wang, Nature 2023, 623, 739

    2023

  39. [40]

    J. Hou, J. Zhang, S. Wu, X. Liu, Y . Li, Z. Yan, K. Zhang, Y . Lu, J. Chen, Adv. Mater . 2026, 38, e15430

    2026

  40. [43]

    A. C. Dutra, B. A. Goldmann, M. S. Islam, J. A. Dawson, Nat. Rev. Mater. 2025, 10, 566

    2025

  41. [44]

    W. Shin, K. Min, J. Energy Storage 2026, 154, 121104. 49

    2026

  42. [46]

    D. Guo, D. Yang, H. Zhang, J. Song, P. Wang, Q. Zhu, R. Xu, R. Zhang, S. Ma, X. Bi, X. Zhang, X. Yu, Y . Wu, Z. F. Wu, Z. Gou, Z. Shao, Z. Li, Z. Gao, A. Liu, B. Xue, B. Wang, B. Wu, B. Feng, C. Lu, C. Zhao, C. Deng, C. Ruan, D. Dai, D. Chen, et al., Nature 2025, 645, 633

    2025

  43. [48]

    Zhang, J

    J. Zhang, J. Li, G. Zhao, Q. Wang, Y .-G. Guo, C. Yang, J. Am. Chem. Soc. 2025, 147, 40496

    2025

  44. [49]

    Q. Wang, F. Yang, Y . Wang, D. Zhang, R. Sato, L. Zhang, E. J. Cheng, Y . Yan, Y . Chen, K. Kisu, Angew. Chem. Int. Ed. 2025, 64, e202506573

    2025

  45. [50]

    B. D. Lund, T. Wang, Libr. Hi Tech News 2023, 40, 26

    2023

  46. [51]

    A. Jain, S. P . Ong, G. Hautier, W. Chen, W. D. Richards, S. Dacek, S. Cholia, D. Gunter, D. Skinner, G. Ceder, K. A. Persson, APL Mater . 2013, 1, 011002

    2013

  47. [52]

    Kirklin, J

    S. Kirklin, J. E. Saal, B. Meredig, A. Thompson, J. W. Doak, M. Aykol, S. Rühl, C. Wolverton, Npj Comput. Mater. 2015, 1, 15010

    2015

  48. [53]

    C. J. Hargreaves, M. W. Gaultois, L. M. Daniels, E. J. Watts, V . A. Kurlin, M. Moran, Y . Dang, R. Morris, A. Morscher, K. Thompson, M. A. Wright, B.-E. Prasad, F. Blanc, C. M. Collins, C. A. Crawford, B. B. Duff, J. Evans, J. Gamon, G. Han, B. T. Leube, H. Niu, A. J. Perez, A. Robinson, O. Rogan, P. M. Sharp, E. Shoko, M. Sonni, W. J. Thomas, A. Vasylen...

    2023

  49. [54]

    F. Yang, Q. Wang, E. J. Cheng, D. Zhang, H. Li, Comput. Mater. Contin. 2024, 81, 3413

    2024

  50. [55]

    F. Yang, E. Campos Dos Santos, X. Jia, R. Sato, K. Kisu, Y . Hashimoto, S. Orimo, H. Li, Nano Mater. Sci. 2024, 6, 256

    2024

  51. [56]

    M. P. Polak, D. Morgan, Nat. Commun. 2024, 15, 1569

    2024

  52. [60]

    Data Generation for Machine Learning Interatomic Potentials and Beyond | Chemical Reviews,

  53. [61]

    Kalita, H

    B. Kalita, H. Gokcan, O. Isayev, Nat. Comput. Sci. 2025, 5, 1120

    2025

  54. [62]

    Jacobs, D

    R. Jacobs, D. Morgan, S. Attarian, J. Meng, C. Shen, Z. Wu, C. Y . Xie, J. H. Yang, N. Artrith, B. Blaiszik, G. Ceder, K. Choudhary, G. Csanyi, E. D. Cubuk, B. Deng, R. Drautz, X. Fu, J. Godwin, V . Honavar, O. Isayev, A. Johansson, B. Kozinsky, S. Martiniani, S. P. Ong, I. Poltavsky, K. Schmidt, S. Takamoto, A. P . Thompson, J. Westermayr, et al., Curr. ...

    2025

  55. [63]

    O. T. Unke, S. Chmiela, H. E. Sauceda, M. Gastegger, I. Poltavsky, K. T. Schütt, A. Tkatchenko, K.-R. Müller, Chem. Rev. 2021, 121, 10142

    2021

  56. [64]

    J. Choi, G. Nam, J. Choi, Y . Jung, JACS Au 2025, 5, 1499. 50

    2025

  57. [65]

    E. C.-Y . Yuan, Y . Liu, J. Chen, P. Zhong, S. Raja, T. Kreiman, S. Vargas, W. Xu, M. Head-Gordon, C. Yang, S. M. Blau, B. Cheng, A. Krishnapriyan, T. Head-Gordon, Nat. Rev. Chem. 2026, 10, 212

    2026

  58. [66]

    Y . You, D. Zhang, F. Wu, X. Cao, Y . Sun, Z.-Z. Zhu, S. Wu, Npj Comput. Mater. 2024, 10, 57

    2024

  59. [67]

    Marcolongo, T

    A. Marcolongo, T. Binninger, F. Zipoli, T. Laino, ChemSystemsChem 2020, 2, e1900031

    2020

  60. [68]

    Z. Xu, H. Duan, Z. Dou, M. Zheng, Y . Lin, Y . Xia, H. Zhao, Y . Xia, Npj Comput. Mater. 2023, 9, 105

    2023

  61. [69]

    R. Wang, M. Guo, Y . Gao, X. Wang, Y . Zhang, B. Deng, M. Shi, L. Zhang, Z. Zhong, Npj Comput. Mater. 2025, 11, 266

    2025

  62. [70]

    Winter, R

    G. Winter, R. Gómez-Bombarelli, J. Phys. Energy 2023, 5, 024004

    2023

  63. [71]

    J. Qi, S. Banerjee, Y . Zuo, C. Chen, Z. Zhu, M. L. Holekevi Chandrappa, X. Li, S. P. Ong, Mater. Today Phys. 2021, 21, 100463

    2021

  64. [72]

    Miyagawa, N

    T. Miyagawa, N. Krishnan, M. Grumet, C. R. Baecker, W. Kaiser, D. A. Egger, J. Mater. Chem. A 2024, 12, 11344

    2024

  65. [73]

    J. Lee, S. Ju, S. Hwang, J. You, J. Jung, Y . Kang, S. Han, ACS Appl. Mater. Interfaces 2024, 16, 46442

    2024

  66. [74]

    M. Jang, K. Park, H.-G. Jung, K. Y . Chung, J. H. Shim, O. Kwon, S. Yu, J. Mater. Chem. A 2025, 13, 16547

    2025

  67. [75]

    Z. Chen, T. Du, N. M. A. Krishnan, Y . Yue, M. M. Smedskjaer, Nat. Commun. 2025, 16, 1057

    2025

  68. [76]

    Z. Li, J. Huang, X. Ren, J. Li, R. Xiao, H. Li, J. Power Sources 2025, 640, 236632

    2025

  69. [77]

    C. G. Staacke, T. Huss, J. T. Margraf, K. Reuter, C. Scheurer, Nanomaterials 2022, 12

    2022

  70. [78]

    M. Lei, B. Li, H. Liu, D. Jiang, Angew. Chem. Int. Ed. 2024, 63, e202315628

    2024

  71. [79]

    Zhang, J.-D

    Y . Zhang, J.-D. Luo, H.-B. Yao, B. Jiang, Artif. Intell. Chem. 2024, 2, 100051

    2024

  72. [80]

    B. Deng, P. Zhong, K. Jun, J. Riebesell, K. Han, C. J. Bartel, G. Ceder, Nat. Mach. Intell. 2023, 5, 1031

    2023

  73. [81]

    J. Böhm, A. Champagne, Predicting Crystal Structures and Ionic Conductivities in Li$_{3}$YCl$_{6-x}$Br$_{x}$ Halide Solid Electrolytes Using a Fine-Tuned Machine Learning Interatomic Potential, 2025

    2025

  74. [82]

    Y . Ou, Y . Ikeda, L. Scholz, S. Divinski, F. Fritzen, B. Grabowski, Phys. Rev. Mater . 2024, 8, 115407

    2024

  75. [83]

    Y . Ou, L. Scholz, S. Keshav, Y . Ikeda, M. Kraft, S. Divinski, R. Gómez-Bombarelli, W. G. Zeier, F. Fritzen, B. Grabowski, Non-Arrhenius Li-ion transport and grain-size effects in argyrodite solid electrolytes, 2025

    2025

  76. [84]

    K. Kim, N. Adelstein, A. Dive, A. Grieder, S. Kang, B. C. Wood, L. F. Wan, Energy Storage Mater. 2024, 73, 103842

    2024

  77. [85]

    X. Guo, J. Mater. Chem. A 2025, 13, 38919. 51

    2025

  78. [86]

    M. K. Ncube, P. Barai, S. C. Selvaraj, L. A. Curtiss, A. T. Ngo, V . Srinivasan, Ionic Interdiffusion at Cathode-Solid-Electrolyte Interface: A Machine Learning-Assisted Multiscale Investigation and Mitigation Strategies, 2025

    2025

  79. [87]

    M. L. Holekevi Chandrappa, J. Qi, C. Chen, S. Banerjee, S. P. Ong, J. Am. Chem. Soc. 2022, 144, 18009

    2022

  80. [88]

    Zhong, K

    P. Zhong, K. A. Persson, ACS Energy Lett. 2026, 11, 806

    2026

Showing first 80 references.