EN | JP | Last sync: 2025-11-21

Chapter 1: United States MI Projects

The United States has been at the forefront of Materials Informatics (MI) development since the launch of the Materials Genome Initiative in 2011. This chapter provides a comprehensive overview of major US government-funded programs, national laboratory initiatives, and academic-industry collaborations that have shaped the global MI landscape.

Learning Objectives

1.1 Materials Genome Initiative (MGI)

The Materials Genome Initiative (MGI) is a multi-agency initiative launched by the White House Office of Science and Technology Policy (OSTP) in June 2011. It represents the most comprehensive government-led effort to accelerate materials discovery and deployment.

1.1.1 Initiative Overview

Attribute Details
Launch Date June 24, 2011
Launched By White House Office of Science and Technology Policy (OSTP)
Cumulative Budget Over $1 billion (2011-2024)
Primary Goal Reduce materials development time by 50% (from 20 years to 10 years)
Status Active
Official Website https://www.mgi.gov/

1.1.2 Participating Agencies

MGI coordinates efforts across multiple federal agencies:

1.1.3 Key Outputs and Infrastructure

MGI Key Deliverables

1.1.4 MGI Strategic Framework

graph TD A[MGI Vision] --> B[Computational Tools] A --> C[Experimental Tools] A --> D[Digital Data] B --> E[Open-Source Software] B --> F[High-Performance Computing] C --> G[High-Throughput Synthesis] C --> H[Automated Characterization] D --> I[Standardized Formats] D --> J[Interoperable Databases] E --> K[Accelerated Materials Discovery] F --> K G --> K H --> K I --> K J --> K K --> L[50% Reduction in Development Time] style A fill:#667eea,color:#fff style K fill:#764ba2,color:#fff style L fill:#4caf50,color:#fff

1.2 DMREF (NSF)

The Designing Materials to Revolutionize and Engineer our Future (DMREF) program is NSF's primary contribution to the Materials Genome Initiative, focusing on fundamental research that integrates theory, computation, and experiment.

1.2.1 Program Overview

Attribute Details
Full Name Designing Materials to Revolutionize and Engineer our Future
Duration 2012 - Present
FY2024-2025 Budget $72.5 million
Typical Award Size $1.5 - $2.0 million over 4 years
Award Duration 4 years (renewable)
Official Website https://www.nsf.gov/funding/opportunities/dmref

1.2.2 Program Objectives

DMREF supports research that:

1.2.3 Research Focus Areas

DMREF Priority Areas

1.2.4 Representative DMREF Funded Projects (2015-2024)

The following table presents representative DMREF-funded projects that exemplify the program's integrated computational-experimental approach to materials discovery:

Year Project Title Lead PI Institution Budget Focus Area
2015Integrated Framework for Design of Alloy-Oxide Thin FilmsC. WolvertonNorthwestern$1.6MThin Films
2015Accelerated Discovery of Sodium Ion ConductorsG. CederMIT/LBNL$1.8MBattery Materials
2016Design of Multifunctional Perovskite OxidesL.Q. ChenPenn State$1.7MFunctional Oxides
2016Predictive Design of High-Entropy CeramicsK. PageOak Ridge NL$1.5MCeramics
2017Machine Learning for Soft Materials DesignF. EscobedoCornell/UCSB$1.9MPolymers
2017Data-Driven Discovery of Thermoelectric MaterialsE. TobererColorado School of Mines$1.6MThermoelectrics
2018Deep Learning for Metallic Glass DiscoveryJ. SchroersYale$1.8MMetallic Glasses
2018AI-Accelerated Design of PhotocatalystsJ. GregoireCaltech$2.0MCatalysis
2019Active Learning for Autonomous Materials DiscoveryR. Gomez-BombarelliMIT$1.9MML Methods
2019Inverse Design of Quantum MaterialsP. NarangHarvard$1.7MQuantum Materials
2020High-Entropy Alloy Design via Multi-fidelity MLA. MishraGeorgia Tech$1.8MAlloys
2020Autonomous Synthesis of 2D MaterialsE. PopStanford$2.0M2D Materials
2021Self-Driving Labs for Battery Electrolyte DiscoveryJ. NandaMichigan/ORNL$1.9MBatteries
2021Foundation Models for Materials Property PredictionS. ErmonStanford$2.0MML Foundation
2022Graph Neural Networks for Heterogeneous CatalysisZ. UlissiCMU/Meta$1.8MCatalysis
2022Generative AI for Organic Semiconductor DesignA. Aspuru-GuzikToronto/Harvard$1.7MOrganic Electronics
2023Large Language Models for Materials SynthesisE. OlivettiMIT$2.0MSynthesis Planning
2023Multi-Agent Systems for Autonomous LabsC. ColeyMIT$1.9MAutonomous Labs
2024Physics-Informed Neural Networks for Alloy DesignW. CurtinEPFL/Brown$1.8MStructural Alloys
2024Closed-Loop Polymer Discovery PlatformR. RamprasadGeorgia Tech$2.0MPolymers
DMREF Program Statistics (2012-2024)

1.3 ARPA-E Programs

The Advanced Research Projects Agency-Energy (ARPA-E) funds high-risk, high-reward energy technology projects, including several materials-focused programs that leverage MI approaches.

1.3.1 Agency Overview

Attribute Details
Established 2009
Total Investment $4.21 billion (2009-2024)
Projects Funded 1,700+ projects
Follow-on Investment $15+ billion in private follow-on funding
Official Website https://arpa-e.energy.gov/

1.3.2 Materials-Focused Programs

HESTIA (High-Energy Storage Through Advanced Materials)

MAGNITO (Magnetic Materials for Grid Technologies)

ULTIMATE (Ultra-Lightweight Technologies for Innovative Materials and Advanced Transportation Efficiency)

1.3.3 Impact Metrics

ARPA-E Success Indicators

1.3.4 ARPA-E DIFFERENTIATE Program Projects (2019-2024)

The DIFFERENTIATE (Design Intelligence Fostering Formidable Energy Reduction Through Integrated AI and Experimentation) program specifically funds AI/ML approaches for energy materials discovery:

Year Project Title Lead Organization Budget Focus
2019ML-Accelerated Battery Materials DiscoveryCMU/Citrine/MIT$600KBattery Cathodes
2019Neural Network Potentials for Alloy DesignNorthwestern/MIT$750KMetal-Insulator Transition
2020Autonomous Discovery of Solid Ion ConductorsCitrine Informatics$800KSolid Electrolytes
2020ML-Enhanced Battery Materials ScreeningNREL$650KLi-ion Batteries
2021AI-Driven Fusion Materials DiscoverySavannah River NL$900KRadiation-Resistant Alloys
2021Generative Models for Solar Cell DesignStanford/SLAC$850KPerovskite PV
2022Robotic Synthesis with Active LearningArgonne NL$1.0MCatalyst Discovery
2023Foundation Models for Energy MaterialsMicrosoft Research/PNNL$1.2MCross-domain Transfer
DIFFERENTIATE Program Impact

1.4 Materials Project (LBNL)

The Materials Project is one of the most influential open-access databases in materials science, hosted at Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory (LBNL). It provides computed materials properties using density functional theory (DFT) calculations.

1.4.1 Database Overview

Attribute Details
Launch Year 2011
Host Institution Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory (LBNL)
Compounds in Database 80,000+ inorganic compounds
Registered Users 300,000+ worldwide
Founders Kristin Persson, Gerbrand Ceder
Official Website https://materialsproject.org/

1.4.2 Available Data and Properties

The Materials Project provides the following computed properties:

1.4.3 API and Tools

Code Example: Accessing Materials Project API
# Requirements:
# - Python 3.9+
# - mp-api>=0.30.0

"""
Example: Querying Materials Project for battery materials

Purpose: Demonstrate Materials Project API usage
Target: Intermediate
Execution time: 10-30 seconds
Dependencies: mp-api
"""

from mp_api.client import MPRester

# Initialize with your API key (get from materialsproject.org)
with MPRester("YOUR_API_KEY") as mpr:
    # Search for lithium-containing oxides with band gap > 2 eV
    results = mpr.summary.search(
        elements=["Li", "O"],
        band_gap=(2, None),  # Band gap greater than 2 eV
        fields=["material_id", "formula_pretty", "band_gap", "energy_above_hull"]
    )

    print(f"Found {len(results)} materials")

    # Display top 5 results
    for doc in results[:5]:
        print(f"ID: {doc.material_id}")
        print(f"  Formula: {doc.formula_pretty}")
        print(f"  Band Gap: {doc.band_gap:.2f} eV")
        print(f"  Energy Above Hull: {doc.energy_above_hull:.4f} eV/atom")
        print()

# Example output:
# Found 2847 materials
# ID: mp-1234
#   Formula: Li2O
#   Band Gap: 5.02 eV
#   Energy Above Hull: 0.0000 eV/atom

1.4.4 Impact on the Field

1.5 MICCoM (DOE)

The Midwest Integrated Center for Computational Materials (MICCoM) is a DOE-funded center focused on developing and applying computational methods for materials discovery.

1.5.1 Center Overview

Attribute Details
Full Name Midwest Integrated Center for Computational Materials
Annual Budget $3 million/year
Headquarters Argonne National Laboratory
Partner Institutions University of Chicago, Northwestern University, University of Notre Dame

1.5.2 Research Focus Areas

1.5.3 Computational Capabilities

MICCoM leverages DOE supercomputing resources including:

1.6 ORNL Autonomous Chemistry Lab

Oak Ridge National Laboratory (ORNL) operates an Autonomous Chemistry Laboratory that combines AI-driven planning with robotic synthesis for accelerated materials discovery.

1.6.1 Facility Overview

Attribute Details
Location Oak Ridge National Laboratory, Tennessee
Focus AI-driven autonomous materials discovery
Capabilities Robotics + AI synthesis planning + automated characterization

1.6.2 Key Capabilities

1.6.3 Notable Achievements

ORNL Autonomous Lab Accomplishments

1.7 NIST Materials Data Infrastructure

The National Institute of Standards and Technology (NIST) plays a crucial role in MGI by developing standards, reference data, and infrastructure for materials data.

1.7.1 NIST MGI Role

Attribute Details
Role MGI leadership and coordination
Focus Areas Data standards, reference databases, measurement science
Key Outputs Materials Resource Registry, CALPHAD databases

1.7.2 Key Infrastructure Projects

Materials Resource Registry (MRR)

CALPHAD Databases

Materials Data Curation System (MDCS)

1.8 Comparison of US MI Projects

The following table provides a comprehensive comparison of major US Materials Informatics initiatives:

Project Lead Agency Budget Focus Primary Output Status
MGI OSTP (Multi-agency) $1B+ cumulative Overall coordination Policy, infrastructure Active
DMREF NSF $72.5M/year Fundamental research Academic publications Active
ARPA-E DOE $4.21B total High-risk energy tech Startups, patents Active
Materials Project DOE (LBNL) ~$5M/year Open database 80,000+ compounds Active
MICCoM DOE (ANL) $3M/year Computational methods Software, methods Active
ORNL Auto Lab DOE (ORNL) ~$10M/year Autonomous discovery Automated synthesis Active
NIST MRR NIST ~$5M/year Data infrastructure Standards, registries Active

1.9 Timeline of US MI Development

The following diagram illustrates the chronological development of Materials Informatics in the United States:

timeline title US Materials Informatics Timeline section 2009-2011 2009 : ARPA-E Established 2011 : MGI Launched by White House : Materials Project Goes Public section 2012-2015 2012 : DMREF Program Begins 2014 : First MGI Strategic Plan 2015 : MICCoM Established section 2016-2020 2017 : Second MGI Strategic Plan 2019 : Materials Project 100K users 2020 : COVID-19 accelerates digital methods section 2021-Present 2021 : Third MGI Strategic Plan : ORNL Autonomous Lab Operational 2022 : Materials Project 150K+ compounds 2023 : AI/ML integration accelerates 2024 : Exascale computing for materials

1.10 Chapter Summary

The United States has established a comprehensive ecosystem for Materials Informatics through coordinated government initiatives, national laboratory programs, and academic research. Key takeaways include:

Key Findings

Practical Recommendations

Exercises

Exercise 1: MGI Agency Roles Easy

Problem: Match each federal agency with its primary role in the Materials Genome Initiative:

  1. NSF
  2. DOE
  3. NIST
  4. DARPA

Roles: (A) Standards and data infrastructure, (B) Fundamental research and education, (C) Energy materials and computing, (D) High-risk defense research

Solution:

  1. NSF - (B) Fundamental research and education
  2. DOE - (C) Energy materials and computing
  3. NIST - (A) Standards and data infrastructure
  4. DARPA - (D) High-risk defense research
Exercise 2: Materials Project Query Medium

Problem: Write a Materials Project API query to find all stable (energy above hull = 0) compounds containing both Fe and O with a band gap between 1.5 and 3.0 eV. How many materials match these criteria?

Solution:

from mp_api.client import MPRester

with MPRester("YOUR_API_KEY") as mpr:
    results = mpr.summary.search(
        elements=["Fe", "O"],
        band_gap=(1.5, 3.0),
        energy_above_hull=(0, 0.001),  # Essentially stable
        fields=["material_id", "formula_pretty", "band_gap"]
    )

    print(f"Found {len(results)} stable Fe-O compounds with band gap 1.5-3.0 eV")
    for doc in results[:10]:
        print(f"  {doc.formula_pretty}: {doc.band_gap:.2f} eV")

# Typical result: ~50-100 materials depending on database version
Exercise 3: Funding Analysis Medium

Problem: Calculate the approximate annual funding rate of the MGI since its launch in 2011. Compare this to DMREF's annual budget. What does this comparison tell you about the relative priorities of different funding mechanisms?

Solution:

Calculation:

Analysis:

Exercise 4: Program Selection Hard

Problem: You are a materials scientist at a startup developing new solid-state battery electrolytes. Which US funding program(s) would be most appropriate for your research, and why? Consider: (1) Technology readiness level, (2) Funding size, (3) Timeline, and (4) IP considerations.

Solution:

Recommended Programs:

  1. Primary: ARPA-E
    • Best fit for startup with transformational energy technology
    • Funding size: $1-10M typical, suitable for R&D scale-up
    • Flexible IP terms (startup retains ownership)
    • 3-year timeline matches startup development cycles
  2. Secondary: DOE SBIR/STTR
    • Phase I: $200K for proof-of-concept (6 months)
    • Phase II: $1.5M for development (2 years)
    • Lower barrier to entry than ARPA-E
  3. Complementary: MICCoM Collaboration
    • Access to computational resources for electrolyte screening
    • Partnership rather than direct funding
    • Leverage existing DFT databases for solid electrolytes

Not Recommended:

References

  1. National Science and Technology Council. (2021). Materials Genome Initiative Strategic Plan 2021. White House Office of Science and Technology Policy.
  2. Jain, A., Ong, S. P., Hautier, G., Chen, W., Richards, W. D., Dacek, S., Cholia, S., Gunter, D., Skinner, D., Ceder, G., Persson, K. A. (2013). Commentary: The Materials Project: A materials genome approach to accelerating materials innovation. APL Materials, 1(1), 011002.
  3. National Science Foundation. (2024). DMREF: Designing Materials to Revolutionize and Engineer our Future. NSF Program Solicitation 24-529.
  4. ARPA-E. (2024). ARPA-E Impact Report 2024. U.S. Department of Energy.
  5. Curtarolo, S., Hart, G. L., Nardelli, M. B., Mingo, N., Sanvito, S., Levy, O. (2013). The high-throughput highway to computational materials design. Nature Materials, 12(3), 191-201.
  6. de Pablo, J. J., Jackson, N. E., Webb, M. A., Chen, L. Q., Moore, J. E., Morgan, D., Jacobs, R., Pollock, T., Schlom, D. G., Toberer, E. S., Analytis, J., Dabo, I., DeLongchamp, D. M., Fiez, G. A., Grason, G. M., Hautier, G., Mo, Y., Rajan, K., Reed, E. J., ... Ward, L. (2019). New frontiers for the materials genome initiative. npj Computational Materials, 5(1), 41.

Disclaimer