Which alloy composition,what process parameters? Inferring the recipe from optimized metallic microstructure and texture
cs.AI, cond-mat.mtrl-sci, cs.CE
Submitted: 2026-10-06
Updated: 2026-10-06
Code: https://github.com/mahishguru/structure-process
License: http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/
The gist: The mechanical properties of a metallic alloy are set by its microstructure and texture: the size and shape of its grains and the orientation of their crystals.
Terminology
Abstract
The mechanical properties of a metallic alloy are set by its microstructure and texture: the size and shape of its grains and the orientation of their crystals. That structure is in turn set by a recipe, the alloy composition together with the processing parameters. Alloy development runs this chain forwards, tuning the structure until a target property is met. Running it backwards, from an optimized structure to the recipe that would produce it, still relies on expert knowledge. We ask whether this backwards step can be learned. On an in-house dataset of 107 magnesium alloy extrusion conditions across 14 alloys, each with optical micrographs and an X-ray texture measurement, we compare three descriptors of microstructure and texture: conventional grain and texture statistics, a vision embedding from a pretrained image encoder, and a graph neural network on the grain network. Each is paired with prediction heads for two tasks: the alloy composition given the process (Task A), and the process parameters given the composition (Task B). Under 5-fold cross-validation, the conventional descriptors identify the correct alloy for 65% of held-out conditions, against 17% for always guessing the most common alloy, while the learned embeddings stay below 30%. The process parameters are recoverable but noisier: compared with using the composition alone, the microstructure roughly halves the temperature error. Because only a few alloys were cast and only a few press settings were used, both answers are discrete, and heads that pick from these known options, while respecting their order, worked better than heads that predict a free value.
Sources
- Co-PiLOT: Constrained Physics-Informed Latent Optimization for Target-Driven Inverse Design
- An Image is Worth 16x16 Words: Transformers for Image Recognition at Scale
- Scaling Rectified Flow Transformers for High-Resolution Image Synthesis
- Graph Attention Networks
- Learning Fine-grained Image Similarity with Deep Ranking
- XGBoost: A Scalable Tree Boosting System
- Revisiting Deep Learning Models for Tabular Data
Related papers
- MAVEN-T: Reinforced Heterogeneous Distillation for Real-Time Multi-Agent Trajectory Prediction
- Model Discovery Agent: LLM-assisted Bayesian experiment design for data-efficient discovery of mechanistic world models
- Agents' Last Exam
- The Clinician's Veto: Navigating Trust, Liability, and Uncertainty in Autonomous AI Prescribing
- MindHelper: Closed-Loop Embodied Mental-State Reasoning for Precision Intervention
- Incumbent Advantage: Brand Bias and Cognitive Manipulation Dynamics in LLM Recommendation Systems