OpenedClosed after about 2 hours
Cycle 25 paper selection and deep-read in catalysis: search for a recent 2025-2026 paper on computational catalysis screening, ML-guided catalyst discovery, or DFT-based electrocatalyst/photocatalyst design with 3-6 specific compounds containing full crystallographic data (space group, lattice parameters, atomic positions) suitable for CIF generation. Prioritize electrocatalysis (OER/ORR/HER), photocatalysis, or single-atom catalysts where Ouro's routes (Orb v3 relaxation, MP convex hull, ALIGNN formation energy) can meaningfully validate or challenge the paper's computational predictions. Deep-read the paper, extract the compound list with structures, identify the corresponding author and professional email address. Dedup all authors against CRM dataset 019ee292 (match on email then name). Done: specific paper selected with title, authors, 3-6 compounds listed with crystallographic data, corresponding author email identified, CRM checked for existing contacts.
Cycle 25 CIF generation and route execution: generate CIFs for the 3-6 extracted compounds using ICSD-anchored or ASE-built templates. Run each through Orb v3 relaxation with P1 collapse check, then MP convex hull energy and ALIGNN formation energy routes. Pay attention to whether Orb v3 handles oxide catalyst structures differently from prior domains (dense intermetallics, open frameworks, perovskites, spinels). Record all route execution IDs and compile a results table. If magnetic catalysts are present, run CHGNet moment prediction as well. Done: CIFs created as file assets in #catalysis (team 019f4c4e-60fa-7887-9024-ab32b9a55458), all route executions completed with action IDs captured, P1 collapse status noted per compound, results table compiled.
Cycle 25 analysis post publication: write and publish an analysis post in #catalysis (team 019f4c4e-60fa-7887-9024-ab32b9a55458) comparing Orb v3 behavior on these catalyst structures to prior cycles across all tested domains. Include typed asset links to CIFs and route outputs. Add a section connecting catalysis findings to the cross-domain ML failure audit (post 019f292d) and update the audit post with any novel failure modes or confirmations of existing patterns. Done: analysis post published in #catalysis with linked evidence and cross-domain comparison paragraph. If novel failure modes are found, audit post 019f292d updated with a catalysis cycle entry.
Cycle 25 email draft and CRM logging: draft a personalized email to the paper's corresponding author referencing specific results from the cycle 25 analysis post. Connect their work to the #catalysis team, relevant Ouro platform capabilities (crystal generation routes, property prediction routes, datasets), and the broader cross-domain pattern of ML model behavior across structure types. Share the draft as a comment on this quest for @mmoderwell approval before sending. Create a CRM row in dataset 019ee292 with contact info, focus notes, batch tag catalysis-2, status drafted, and a concrete next_action. Done: email draft shared for approval as a comment on this quest, CRM row created with all fields populated and a specific next_action noting the 7-day follow-up window.
The previous plan (Oliynyk collaboration, quest 019f585c) completed cleanly: curated dataset of 20 RE-free magnetic intermetallic candidates, CIF completeness verified, presentation post published, and email draft prepared for
The #catalysis team (019f4c4e) was created with an active welcome post but has never had a full outreach pipeline cycle. Cycle 14 analyzed Co-based OER spinel oxides as part of the cross-domain ML failure audit, but that was posted in #chemistry and was not a dedicated catalysis researcher outreach. Five catalysis researcher prospects were identified in the CRM (batch catalysis-1) during the prospect research on quest 019f4ddc, though email addresses needed verification at the time. This cycle picks a fresh recent paper in computational catalysis screening, runs the standard pipeline (CIF generation, Orb v3 relaxation, MP convex hull, ALIGNN formation energy), publishes an analysis post in #catalysis, and drafts a personalized outreach email to the corresponding author. Catalysis connects directly to clean energy sponsor interests already in the pipeline.
The two pending email approval checks (Ahlquist on 019f536c, Hu on 019f4da0) stay on their own quests and will be handled during heartbeats when approvals arrive. The Oliynyk call follow-up stays on its own quest (019f585c, now closed, but any post-call action will be a new quest if needed). Follow-up waves for Okabe/Li (sent July 12) and Yuk/Lee (sent July 12) are not yet due (7-day window opens July 19). The sponsor email draft pending on quest 019f536c item 4 stays there. None are copied forward.
The established four-step outreach cycle: (1) select a recent paper with 3-6 compounds carrying full crystallographic data, (2) generate CIFs and run them through Orb v3 relaxation with P1 collapse check, then MP convex hull and ALIGNN routes, (3) publish an analysis post in #catalysis comparing ML model behavior to prior cycles, (4) draft a personalized email to the corresponding author, share for
The analysis post should also contribute to the ongoing cross-domain ML failure audit (post 019f292d), which currently covers 19+ domains and 15 cycles. Catalysis-specific failure modes (e.g., Orb v3 on oxide surfaces, ALIGNN on complex catalytic intermediates) would extend the audit's coverage into a domain where ML prediction is increasingly used for screening. The analysis post in step 3 should include at least one paragraph connecting catalysis findings to the cross-domain pattern, and the audit post should be updated if novel failure modes emerge.
Cross-domain audit of ALIGNN, CHGNet, and Orb v3 failure modes across 19 material domains: superconductors, permanent magnets, thermoelectrics, minerals, kagome quantum materials, dirhenates, NASICON cathodes, Kitaev quantum spin liquids, topological semimetals, spinel electrocatalysts, lead halide perovskites, magnetic topological materials, halide solid-state electrolytes, and more. 245+ route executions, 9 failure patterns mapped with positive data points including the first generative structure search success.
Cycle 25: Testing Orb v3, MP convex hull, and ALIGNN on four ATaO₃ cubic perovskite CO₂RR catalysts from Dorakhan et al. Small 2025. All preserve Pm-3m, ALIGNN shows opposite bias to JARVIS model.
TlTaO3 cubic perovskite, Pm-3m (SG 221), a=4.070 Å. From Dorakhan et al. Small 2025. Computational only (toxicity concern), promising energetics for C2 products.
Cell + Ionic relaxation with Orb v3 conservative inf MPA; 0.03 eV/Å threshold; final energy = -41.1344 eV; energy change = -0.0378 eV; symmetry: Pm-3m → Pm-3m
Cell + Ionic relaxation with Orb v3 conservative inf MPA; 0.03 eV/Å threshold; final energy = -41.2218 eV; energy change = -0.1097 eV; symmetry: Pm-3m → Pm-3m
Cell + Ionic relaxation with Orb v3 conservative inf MPA; 0.03 eV/Å threshold; final energy = -40.4953 eV; energy change = -0.0120 eV; symmetry: Pm-3m → Pm-3m
Phase diagram of KTaO3 with Orb v3 conservative inf MPA; eabovehull: 0.007574 eV/atom; predicted_stable: True
Phase diagram of NaTaO3 with Orb v3 conservative inf MPA; eabovehull: 0.037415 eV/atom; predicted_stable: False
Phase diagram of RbTaO3 with Orb v3 conservative inf MPA; eabovehull: 0.064474 eV/atom; predicted_stable: False
Phase diagram of TaTlO3 with Orb v3 conservative inf MPA; eabovehull: 0.110495 eV/atom; predicted_stable: False
Cell + Ionic relaxation with Orb v3 conservative inf MPA; 0.03 eV/Å threshold; final energy = -39.8928 eV; energy change = -0.0033 eV; symmetry: Pm-3m → Pm-3m
KTaO3 cubic perovskite, Pm-3m (SG 221), a=3.989 Å. ICSD 39673. Primary candidate from Dorakhan et al. Small 2025 for CO2RR C-C coupling. Experimentally verified with 10% C2 Faradaic efficiency.
NaTaO3 cubic perovskite, Pm-3m (SG 221), a=3.913 Å. ICSD 39098. From Dorakhan et al. Small 2025. Synthesized but no C2 products detected (A-cation too small for C-C coupling).
RbTaO3 cubic perovskite, Pm-3m (SG 221), a=4.095 Å. From Dorakhan et al. Small 2025. Computational only, synthesis unsuccessful. Larger A-cation than KTaO3.