materials-chemistry/no ai/Computational and Structural Biotechnology Journal 2024 · v2
Web tool builds and energy-minimises silver, copper oxide and titania nanoparticles
Researchers built ASCOT, an online tool that constructs spherical nanoparticles atom by atom, relaxes them with classical physics and measures their structure. No machine learning was used; the measurements are meant as inputs for later models.
spectrum · one line per step, placed by what the step does · bright lines used AI
ASCOT: A web tool for the digital construction of energy minimized Ag, CuO, TiO 2 spherical nanoparticles and calculation of their atomistic descriptors
Computational and Structural Biotechnology Journal, 2024
doi:10.1016/j.csbj.2024.03.011 · record aix-00161 v2 · checked 2026-10-09
- AI was for
- —
- Model family
- —
- Checked by
- None stated
- Code
- not reported
No AI or machine learning was used.
What this research was about
Nanoparticles are specks of solid matter only a few billionths of a metre across. At that size, a large share of the atoms sit at the surface rather than buried inside, and the particle's behaviour, including how it interacts with living tissue, depends on how those atoms are arranged. Working out that arrangement by experiment is awkward, so researchers often build particles digitally instead. A particle is carved from the repeating atomic pattern of the bulk crystal, but cutting a sphere out of a crystal leaves a ragged, electrically unbalanced surface. The atoms then have to be allowed to settle into lower-energy positions before any structural measurement means much.
The team set out to make that whole process available through a web page. ASCOT, hosted on the Enalos Cloud Platform, builds neutral, correctly proportioned spheres of silver, copper oxide and titanium dioxide in its anatase and rutile forms, relaxes them, and then computes numbers describing the structure, including average energy per atom and how many neighbours each atom has, reported for the particle as a whole and separately for its core and its outer shell. They ran it across diameters from 2.5 nm upwards in steps of 0.5 nm to 7.0 nm.
Where AI came in
Artificial intelligence was not used in this work. Every step is either crystallography or classical physics. The chosen crystal pattern is repeated to fill a box, atoms beyond the target diameter are deleted, surplus atoms in a thin outer layer are removed until the chemical proportions match the crystal again, and the atoms are then relaxed using a force field, a set of equations describing how atoms push and pull on each other, run in the simulation code LAMMPS. The structural measures that follow come from fixed formulas with neighbour distances set by ionic size. An external tool fixed the shell thickness using a rule-based curve-fitting procedure, not a trained model.
The authors describe the resulting numbers as intended ingredients for machine learning and statistical models that would predict nanoparticle toxicity. That modelling lies outside this paper, so the tool here does the describing and leaves the predicting to others.
Written by AIxSci from the checked record below, to give context for readers outside the field. It is not part of the record.
The work
Technical · from the record
ASCOT is a web tool, hosted on the Enalos Cloud Platform, that builds electrically neutral, stoichiometric spherical nanoparticles of Ag, CuO and TiO2 (anatase and rutile) from selected Crystallography Open Database unit cells, energy-minimises them with a classical force field in LAMMPS, and then computes atomistic descriptors such as average potential energy per atom, average coordination number, common neighbour parameter and hexatic order parameters for the whole particle and separately for its core and shell. The authors ran the tool over particle diameters from 2.5 nm increasing by 0.5 nm up to 7.0 nm and report that average potential energy per atom decreases with size for all four materials over that range, that rutile particles are slightly lower in energy than anatase, and that the choice of force field changes the modelled surface, with a MEAM force field expanding a 3.5 nm anatase particle by 4.5% in x and y and 2.7% in z relative to the geometric construction. No machine learning model is trained or run in the study; the descriptors are presented as intended inputs for later QSAR and machine learning models of nanoparticle toxicity.
How AI was used
AI was not used. The workflow is crystallographic and physics-based throughout: a pre-selected CIF file per material is replicated along the lattice vectors to the smallest box enclosing the requested sphere, atoms outside the target diameter are deleted, excess-species atoms in a 0.02 Å outer shell are removed (with a fixed random seed where more candidates exist than are needed) until the unit-cell stoichiometry is restored, the triclinic box is converted to orthorhombic and extended by 10 Å per edge to suppress periodic self-interaction, and conjugate-gradient energy minimisation is applied with a force field drawn from the OpenKIM database or, for CuO and TiO2 by default, the internally integrated COMB3 potential, halting on energy tolerance, force tolerance, maximum iterations or maximum force evaluations. Descriptors are then computed by fixed formulas with element-specific neighbour cutoffs based on ionic radii, over core and shell regions separated by a constant 4 Å shell depth; that depth was set by passing ASCOT XYZ files to the external Shell Depth Calculator, which locates the maximum-curvature point with the Kneedle algorithm, a rule-based procedure rather than a learned model. The resulting descriptors are offered as inputs for subsequent machine learning or QSAR model development, which lies outside this paper.
The shape of the work
Structural · the record, drawn
What the record says
Technical · every part carries its own basis
+ in the paper~ our reading− not reported
How to read the quotations. A quotation shows where the paper describes something. It does not quote every value beside it: one passage locates a part of the work, and values without their own quotation are our reading of that passage.
No learned model is trained or run anywhere in the work. The computational pipeline is crystallographic construction plus classical force-field energy minimisation in LAMMPS and deterministic descriptor formulas (coordination number, CNP, hexatic order). Machine learning appears only as a stated downstream intention for the descriptors ('serve as inputs for developing machine learning models to predict the toxicity'), not as something this paper does.
The datasets generated as part of this paper, to demonstrate the power and utility of ASCOT are available via NanoPharoswhere the paper describes this · verbatim
What this paper did not report
Technical · absence is published deliberately
- CodeWhether the code is available is not stated.
- ValidationNo validation of the AI is described.
About this article
Record aix-00161, version 2, checked by a person on 2026-10-09. The record describes the paper; it does not assess whether the paper's findings are right. The paper is published under CC-BY; quotations are at most 25 words. How we work · Report an error