Screen a million candidate compositions for a target property
DFT + ML-potential active-learning screen over 10⁶ candidate compositions for high ionic conductivity at room temperature. Top-100 candidates flagged for synthesis.
- Artefact returned
- Ranked composition list · uncertainty · synthesis routes
- Typical runtime
- ~10 h wall · 2,400 CU
- Cost
- ≈ $7.7k per screen + Pro seat
The expanded snippet.
The version that lands in production — with the annotations a colleague would want when picking up the work. Copy-paste, swap in your inputs, run.
from apex import Aether
simos = Aether(api_key=os.environ["APEX_API_KEY"])
# DFT + ML-potential active-learning screen over a composition space. Returns
# a ranked list of top candidates with predicted property, uncertainty, and a
# proposed synthesis route — ready for wet-lab confirmation.
screen = simos.materials_screen(
target_property="ionic_conductivity",
target_value={"min_S_per_cm": 1e-2, "temp_K": 300},
composition_space="Li-La-Zr-O + dopants(Mg, Al, Ga, In)",
method="dft+ml_potential+active_learning",
constraints={
"max_formation_energy_eV": 0.05,
"stable_phase": True,
"band_gap_min_eV": 4.0,
},
n_candidates=1_000_000,
n_to_surface=100,
propose_synthesis=True,
confidence_floor=0.85,
)
for c in screen.top():
print(
f"{c.composition:24s} "
f"sigma={c.predicted_conductivity:.2e} S/cm "
f"ci=[{c.ci_low:.2e}, {c.ci_high:.2e}] "
f"route={c.synthesis_route_short}"
)The numbers in this recipe are real.
What we ran. What we used for inputs. Where the reproduction kit lives, and what reproduces within published bounds.
- 01Composition space: any chemical formula with dopant specification. The cookbook repo ships a small open garnet example.
- 02Method: dft alone, ml-potential alone, or the active-learning combination. The combination is the default.
- 03Reproduces published screening methodology against the literature panel.
- 04Wall time scales with composition space × method; estimate uses 10⁶ candidates with the active-learning method.
Make it your workload.
The recipe is a starting point. The four variations below are the ones we get asked about most. Anything else, write to docs@apexworldlabs.com.
- Different target: any property the runtime knows about. Custom targets via register_property().
- Tighter constraints: tighten the band gap or formation energy and the screen returns fewer, higher-confidence candidates.
- Closed loop: pair this screen with the wet-lab cookbook (autonomous-lab-protocol). The screen surfaces; the lab confirms.
Other workloads worth looking at.
- Engineering · multiphysicsCouple thermal and structural across a transient load
Stream a coupled thermal-structural rollout on a turbine blade, watch max stress and tip temperature evolve, steer the rollout when a margin is approached.
Read the recipe - Drug discoveryRun a FEP+ binding-affinity campaign over a ligand library
Score a 120-ligand library against four protein targets with alchemical FEP. Returns relative ΔΔG and per-edge uncertainty.
Read the recipe - SemiconductorsRTL → GDS at 7nm with PPA targets
Compile Verilog to placed-and-routed GDS at a 7nm predictive PDK with PPA targets and DRC clean. Returns the database with a signed manifest.
Read the recipe
Adapt this to your stack.
Swap in your geometry / target / repo and run it. If your workload is novel, send it and we will co-author the recipe with you.