Papers › Machine Learning Predictions of High-Curie-Temperature Materials
Machine Learning Predictions of High-Curie-Temperature Materials
Joshua F. Belot, Valentin Taufour, Stefano Sanvito, Gus L. W. Hart
The archive published only this paper's code-link row. Authors, date and abstract are from arXiv's metadata (CC0), read from the Kaggle arXiv metadata snapshot of 2026-09-12 where its title matched the archive's; the title is the archive's.
Technologies that function at room temperature often require magnets with a high Curie temperature, T_C, and can be improved with better materials. Discovering magnetic materials with a substantial T_C is challenging because of the large number of candidates and the cost of fabricating and testing them. Using the two largest known data sets of experimental Curie temperatures, we develop machine-learning models to make rapid T_C predictions solely based on the chemical composition of a material. We train a random forest model and a k-NN one and predict on an initial dataset of over 2,500 materials and then validate the model on a new dataset containing over 3,000 entries. The accuracy is compared for multiple compounds' representations ("descriptors") and regression approaches. A random forest model provides the most accurate predictions and is not improved by dimensionality reduction or by using more complex descriptors based on atomic properties. A random forest model trained on a combination of both datasets shows that cobalt-rich and iron-rich materials have the highest Curie temperatures for all binary and ternary compounds. An analysis of the model reveals systematic error that causes the model to over-predict low-T_C materials and under-predict high-T_C materials. For exhaustive searches to find new high-T_C materials, analysis of the learning rate suggests either that much more data is needed or that more efficient descriptors are necessary.
Code
Repository list and official/mentioned flags are the archive's, frozen 2025-07-28. Reachability, where shown, is from one Syntology probe window (2026-09-16 to 2026-09-18); repositories not probed show nothing. GitHub stars are not tracked.
Code Syntology ran Syntology
Not run by Syntology. Nothing on this page verifies that the listed code works.
Results from the paper archive 2025-07-28
No leaderboard rows for this paper in the archive.
Report a problem or propose a change · a person checks every report against the paper or source before anything changes; decisions are listed on /corrections