Skip to main content
Scientific Data logoLink to Scientific Data
. 2020 Mar 3;7:72. doi: 10.1038/s41597-020-0407-9

An automatically curated first-principles database of ferroelectrics

Tess E Smidt 1,2, Stephanie A Mack 1,2,3, Sebastian E Reyes-Lillo 1,2,4, Anubhav Jain 3, Jeffrey B Neaton 1,2,5,
PMCID: PMC7054578  PMID: 32127531

Abstract

Ferroelectric materials have technological applications in information storage and electronic devices. The ferroelectric polar phase can be controlled with external fields, chemical substitution and size-effects in bulk and ultrathin film form, providing a platform for future technologies and for exploratory research. In this work, we integrate spin-polarized density functional theory (DFT) calculations, crystal structure databases, symmetry tools, workflow software, and a custom analysis toolkit to build a library of known, previously-proposed, and newly-proposed ferroelectric materials. With our automated workflow, we screen over 67,000 candidate materials from the Materials Project database to generate a dataset of 255 ferroelectric candidates, and propose 126 new ferroelectric materials. We benchmark our results against experimental data and previous first-principles results. The data provided includes atomic structures, output files, and DFT values of band gaps, energies, and the spontaneous polarization for each ferroelectric candidate. We contribute our workflow and analysis code to the open-source python packages atomate and pymatgen so others can conduct analogous symmetry driven searches for ferroelectrics and related phenomena.

Subject terms: Electronic structure, Ferroelectrics and multiferroics


Measurement(s) ferroelectrics • Workflow
Technology Type(s) digital curation

Machine-accessible metadata file describing the reported data: 10.6084/m9.figshare.11702073

Background & Summary

High-throughput screening of material databases integrated with first-principles calculations has been increasingly successful in the discovery of new functional materials14. While many of the individual components for performing high-throughput searches exist, the infrastructure needed to connect and automate all the necessary components is still under development. The identification of ferroelectrics through symmetry arguments has been an active area of research516. Moreover, lists of known ferroelectrics have been previously curated1723. However, the identification of new ferroelectrics has yet to be automated in a manner readily applicable to emerging materials databases2430. Automated high-throughput searches for ferroelectric candidates would provide a valuable guide for in-depth computational studies and experimental efforts.

Ferroelectrics have important technological applications, such as in tunable capacitors, non-volatile random access memory devices, and electro-optical data storage. In addition, ferroelectrics are capable of displaying couplings between their electronic degrees of freedom with magnetic or lattice degrees of freedom in multiferroic materials. Ferroelectricity often arises from a structural phase transition between a high-symmetry nonpolar structural phase to a low-symmetry polar structural phase with decreasing temperature, resulting in the emergence of a spontaneous polarization3133. In this scenario, the atomic geometry of the nonpolar structure can continuously distort such that the new polar structure has a subset of the symmetries of the original structure, satisfying the requirements of a second-order phase transition; in these cases, the polar space group must be an isotropy subgroup of the nonpolar space group, which is a stronger requirement than they only share a simple group-subgroup relation3436.

Thus, certain ferroelectrics can be systematically screened by searching for pairs of nonpolar and polar structures related by a small symmetry-breaking distortion. In the late 1980s, Abrahams performed some of the earliest searches for ferroelectrics in crystallographic databases using symmetry criteria5,6. More recently, automated searches for new ferroelectric candidates have used symmetry arguments to identify nonpolar reference structures for existing polar materials79. Other studies have used a combination of group theoretic and first-principles calculations to propose ferroelectric candidates1012. Bennett and co-workers proposed using high-throughput calculations to perform chemical substitution into structures of known classes of ferroelectrics1315. Recent work used high-throughput phonon calculations to identify ferroelectrics through polar soft phonon modes of nonpolar phases16.

Previous studies have focused on a limited number of compounds or families of compounds using a relatively narrow set of symmetry conditions. Current curated lists of ferroelectrics only include known ferroelectrics that have been experimentally verified. With shrinking computing costs, high-throughput material searches using first-principles methods provide an efficient strategy to discover and catalog materials. Ferroelectric databases and systematic screening of properties such as band gaps, polarizations, volume expansion, critical temperatures, and coupling to magnetic and/or topological degrees of freedom may lead to new functional materials and potentially new physical phenomena.

In this work, we integrate density functional theory (DFT), crystal structure databases, symmetry tools, workflow software, and a custom analysis toolkit to build a workflow capable of generating libraries of known, previously-proposed and newly-proposed ferroelectrics. This workflow is general and can be used with any crystal structure dataset. We present the results from performing this workflow on the Materials Project database of inorganic crystal structures24. We screen over 67,000 material structures using symmetry relations between nonpolar and polar structure pairs and calculating the polarization from first-principles calculations. We identify 255 ferroelectric candidates, 200 being classified as high-quality candidates by a stringent verification process. Within these high-quality candidates, 74 are known or previously proposed, and 126 are new ferroelectrics. With the workflow developed here, we construct the first automatically-curated first-principles dataset of diverse, multi-class known and new ferroelectrics calculated with a standardized method that permits straightforward comparison. This dataset can be used to develop new tools and criteria for studying ferroelectricity across diverse materials systems. In addition our code for conducting this search has been contributed to the open-source python packages atomate and pymatgen so others can conduct searches of their own and build directly on this work37,38.

Our automated workflow has three stages: symmetry analysis, first-principles calculations, and post-processing. Accordingly, the rest of the work is organized as follows: the description of the workflow, based in the concept of ferroelectric nonpolar-polar symmetry pair, is described in the Methods section. Technical aspects of our workflow and database are included in the section Data Records. Finally, we validate our workflow method against experimental databases of ferroelectrics and verify our workflow is comparable to previous first-principles results in the section Technical Validation.

Methods

Identifying ferroelectricity from first principles

Ferroelectrics are characterized by a polarization versus electric-field hysteresis loop. Experimentally, the spontaneous polarization can be determined as half of the change in polarization at zero external field31. The spontaneous polarization is not a direct observable; one measures the change in spontaneous polarization between two stable configurations of a material39.

In three dimensions, the only space groups compatible with a polarization, meaning they leave a vector invariant under its symmetry operations, are those with polar point groups. Out of the 32 crystallographic point groups, 10 are polar; these polar point groups can keep points along specific lines (point groups 2, 3, 4, 6, mm2, 4mm, 3m, 6mm), planes (point group m), or all points in three-dimensional space (point group 1) invariant40,41. All other point groups are nonpolar. We define polar structures as crystal structures with a polar space group, which is composed of a polar point group plus translations, likewise for nonpolar structures.

Following the modern theory of polarization39,4247, the polarization, P, of a crystal is defined as,

P=P0+i{a,b,c}nieRiΩ, 1

where e is the charge of the electron, ni is an integer, Ri is a primitive lattice vector, and Ω is the unit cell volume (bold letters denote vectors). P0 includes electronic and ionic contributions. The second term on the right hand side of Eq. 1 is the quantum of polarization, eRi/Ω, a consequence of translation symmetry. In the general case, P0 is defined up to any integer multiple of eRi/Ω; for nonmagnetic crystals containing elements from even columns of the Periodic Table, P0 is defined up to even integer multiples. Since we are screening many systems here, we use the more general definition in this work.

Only differences of the computed polarization on the “same branch” are physically meaningful, where different branches are related by integer multiples of the quantum of polarization. Equivalently, the evolution of the polarization along an adiabatic path between two states must be smooth. Nonpolar space groups can only host formal polarizations that are zero or one-half modulo the polarization quantum. We use a nonpolar reference structure to calculate the change in polarization due to a polar distortion. In general, paths between two opposite polar configurations are sufficient to compute the change in polarization; however, we choose to use a nonpolar reference structure in this work as is standard for calculating the polarization from first principles.

To recover a smooth polarization path, we ensure the nonpolar structure must be continuously deformable into the polar structure along a path that preserves the symmetry of the polar structure and for which the system remains insulating. We then perform calculations of multiple structures along the distortion path to compute the spontaneous polarization, which can be compared to experiment. Using this approach, the spontaneous polarization can be directly predicted using first-principles methods with good accuracy48.

Hence, for the purposes of this work, we only consider ferroelectrics for which a high-symmetry nonpolar reference structure can be readily identified in the database for a lower-symmetry polar structure that can support a polarization42. We automate a search for compounds supporting two such phases and then compute the polarization difference along the structural path connecting the two structures.

If a polar ferroelectric structure corresponds to a metastable state, and is higher in energy than a nearby non-polar ground state by a small amount, the system can be considered an antiferroelectric49,50. Antiferroelectrics exhibit double hysteresis loops in polarization versus electric-field measurements; the field-induced first-order phase transition originates with an energy barrier between the nonpolar ground state and the polar metastable phase. In an antiferroelectric, the nonpolar ground state phase is related by a nonpolar distortion to a distinct nonpolar reference structure; the ground state structure is generally characterized as “anti-polar” to distinguish it from the nonpolar reference structure. Symmetry conditions for antiferroelectrics are described in ref. 51. For completeness, we note that to identify antiferroelectrics using the workflow presented here, in addition to finding a reference nonpolar phase, the polar metastable ferroelectric phase and an antipolar ground state, the material would need to display a small energy difference between the polar and antipolar structures on the order of 1–10 meV52.

Workflow overview

We first describe the general workflow diagram comprising symmetry analysis, first-principles calculations, and post-processing. As shown in Fig. 1, the complete workflow involves the passing of data between many separate calculations. In developing our workflow, we automate the following tasks:

  1. Identifying candidate materials possessing nonpolar-polar structure pairs related by a continuous distortion (an isotropy subgroup symmetry relation).

  2. Performing spin-polarized DFT calculations of changes in total energy, band gap, and polarization for multiple structures along the nonpolar-polar distortion.

  3. Post-processing calculation data to compute the spontaneous polarization of the polar ferroelectric phase.

  4. Validating the calculation quality for each ferroelectric candidate.

  5. Creating an interface for viewing the results for all candidates (see the section Graphical Interface).

Fig. 1.

Fig. 1

Diagram of the automated ferroelectric search workflow developed here. Databases are shown as purple cylinders. Processes are shown as rectangles: blue designates processes used to identify and perform first-principles calculations, green designates post-processing and verification, and orange designates the web-interface. Arrow directions indicate the flow of information. For example, the Workflow Database provides information to the Computing Resources about which calculations to compute and the Workflow Database is updated as calculations complete or as errors occur on the Computing Resources.

We start by choosing a crystal structure database on which to perform the search (see Structure Selection Symmetry Analysis). We emphasize that any crystallographic database (e.g. any of the databases described in2430) can be used to perform our workflow, as long as the atomic coordinates and lattice parameters of the structures are provided.

Within the chosen database, we perform a symmetry analysis to find candidate materials possessing nonpolar-polar structure pairs related by a continuous symmetry deformation. Any such pairs found to satisfy the symmetry deformation criteria are stored in the Distortion Database as being deformable by symmetry. This criteria includes the following conditions: (1) The polar structure belongs to a space group that is a subgroup of the space group of the nonpolar structure; and (2) There exists a transformation matrix between the high-symmetry setting of the nonpolar structure to the low-symmetry setting of the polar structure. The latter imposes that the distortion of the lattice parameters and atomic coordinates between the nonpolar and polar structures is continuous, meaning the polar structure belongs to an isotropy subgroup of the nonpolar structure.

We then carry out DFT calculations on the candidate pairs to extract the changes in the band gaps, total energies, and polarization along the nonpolar-polar distortion (see Computational Methods). These results are stored in a Workflow Database and then accessed by our Computing Resources to perform the calculations. Next, the information stored in the Distortion, Workflow, and Calculation Databases is used together to post-process quantities such as the computed spontaneous polarization and to validate ferroelectric candidates using experimental and previous first-principles results (see Post-processing and Spontaneous Polarization Values and Verification of Computational Methodology). The information needed to assess the quality and properties of the candidates is then added to the Candidate Database where it can be accessed by our web Interface for viewing the candidate materials in aggregate (see Graphical Interface). Finally, candidates are screened to ensure the polarization and energy profile across the nonpolar-polar distortion are smooth and continuous, i.e. all calculations ended correctly and provide reliable results.

In the sections below, we describe in detail the methods used for creating an automatically curated dataset of ferroelectrics from the Materials Project database24. The Materials Project database is largely based on structures from the Inorganic Crystal Structure Database (ICSD)27,28 and includes hypothetical structures created through stoichiometric substitution. We use the Materials Project database to test our workflow. Our results for the Materials Project are not intended as the most general curated list of ferroelectrics; however, as the first automatically obtained list of ferroelectrics, they uncover new candidates and provide a blueprint for further studies. More elaborately curated lists may be constructed by applying our workflow to additional databases in future studies. The results from applying our workflow are described below and summarized in Table 1. We note that our workflow is modular and open-source, so it can be readily adapted and applied by others to expand the search for ferroelectrics and related materials such as antiferroelectrics and multiferroics.

Table 1.

Results obtained by applying our workflow to the Materials Project database.

Symmetry Structures ∼67,000
Polar structures ∼15,000
Distinct polar formula ∼10,000
Nonpolar-polar structure pairs ∼17,000
Structure pairs with distinct chemical formulae ∼1,600
Pairs with continuous transformation 413
DFT Pairs with metallic endpoints 80
Pairs with metallic interpolations 59
Pairs with calculation errors 19
Pairs that completed successfully 255
Valid High-quality ferroelectric candidates 200
Known ferroelectrics in high-quality candidates 74
New ferroelectrics in high-quality candidates 126

The symbol indicates “in Materials Project database at time of search”. Boxes relate numbers by symmetry conditions (Symmetry), first-principles calculations (DFT), and validation processes (Valid.). “Nonpolar-polar structure pairs” satisfy simple group-subgroup relations while “pairs with continuous transformation” satisfy group-isotropy subgroup relations.

Structure selection

As motivated earlier, the input to our workflow is a collection of candidate materials possessing nonpolar-polar structure pairs. There are several methods that can be used to create candidate nonpolar-polar structure pairs. For example, one can apply a polar distortion to an existing nonpolar structure or create a hypothetical nonpolar reference structure for an existing polar structure. In this work, to classify a material as a ferroelectric candidate, we require both nonpolar and polar structures to be present in the database. As shown below, even this direct approach provides new candidate materials, previously overlooked as ferroelectrics. Future studies may choose to relax this requirement to identify a greater number of promising materials.

To search for compatible nonpolar-polar structure pairs in the Materials Project dataset, we first select compounds possessing nonpolar and polar structures with space groups which are related by a group-subgroup relation. Note that in principle the same compound may display more than one ferroelectric structural transition, and therefore have more than one nonpolar-polar symmetry pair. For each of these pairs, we require that the number of sites in the nonpolar structure is less than or equal to the number of sites in the polar structure. We perform this initial query using pymatgen, spglib, and the Materials Project API37,5355. We provide the number of nonpolar-polar structures pairs resulting from this query in the top box of Table 1.

At the time of this search, the Materials Project database had approximately 67,000 structures, approximately 15,000 of which are polar. We find approximately 17,000 nonpolar-polar structure pairs related via group-subgroup space group relations. This number is large, in part, because the same polar structure may be paired with multiple possible nonpolar reference structures, and vice versa. This number is also large because the requirement that the polar structure is in a subgroup of the nonpolar space group is a much weaker requirement than the polar structure belongs to an isotropy subgroup of the nonpolar structure–which we check later in the workflow. These roughly 17,000 pairs contain approximately 1,600 of the approximately 10,000 distinct polar compositions in the Materials Project database. The remaining polar compositions in the Materials Project do not have symmetry compatible nonpolar structures within the same composition present in the database. We note that it is possible to propose hypothetical nonpolar reference structures for polar candidates using group theoretic methods or by relaxing the symmetry tolerance between nonpolar-polar distortions79,16; this is left for future work.

Naming conventions

We adopt the pymatgen alphabetical_formula method for the Composition class (with spaces and 1 s removed) to output consistent formulas for our candidates. We note that this method orders elements in such a way that does not match conventions in the literature. For example, we use O3 PbTi where the standard in the literature is PbTiO3. Compositions printed by pymatgen also differ from those used in mineralogy, such as for boracite, lawsonite and many other minerals in our dataset. In our datafiles, we also provide formula name output using the pymatgen reduced_formula method for the Composition class, which sorts elements by electronegativity.

Symmetry analysis

The automated nature of our ferroelectric search relies on strict symmetry criteria. As described in the Structure Selection section, we pre-screen our candidate nonpolar-polar structure pairs using the symmetry tools in pymatgen and spglib to ensure that these pairs satisfy preliminary group-subgroup relationships. We then use the Structure Relations symmetry tool provided by the Bilbao Crystallographic Server (BCS)5658 to impose the symmetry criteria described in the Workflow Overview, namely, to obtain a transformation matrix connecting the lattice parameters and atomic coordinates of the structure pair59,60. The BCS has a freely available web interface for accessing a wide variety of symmetry tools. We create python scripts to automate interaction with and scrape returned data from the BCS to perform our symmetry checks using the python package mechanize61. The Structure Relations tool checks the following:

1.1 The group-subgroup index relations are compatible. The index of a group-subgroup relation indicates the number of ferroelectric domains (distinct polar variants) that arise from the symmetry breaking of the high-symmetry structure.

1.2 There exists a path of maximal subgroups between the high-symmetry structure and low-symmetry structure.

1.3 The Wyckoff position splitting of the high-symmetry structure is compatible with the Wyckoff positions of the low-symmetry structure.

1.4 The lattice of the high-symmetry structure in the low-symmetry setting must be within a defined tolerance of the lattice of the low-symmetry structure (see Symmetry Precision section).

1.5 Each atom in the high-symmetry structure in the low-symmetry setting can be paired to an atom in the low-symmetry structure such that atom pairs are separated by a distance no greater than a given tolerance (see Symmetry Precision section).

Structure Relations takes Crystallographic Information Files (CIFs) of high-symmetry and low-symmetry structures and tolerance threshholds as arguments. We use a lattice tolerance of 3 Å and 10° for lattice parameters and angles, respectively. These tolerances are generous for materials with average sized unit cells (i.e.with lattice parameters less than 20 Å) and permit a wide variety of distortions. For the present work, high-quality candidates are reported for a maximum pairing distance of 1.5 Å. As shown in Table 1, out of the 17,000 structure pairs that we test with Structure Relations, 413 are found to be deformable by symmetry with a maximum distortion less than or equal to 1.5 Å.

Symmetry precision

Symmetry precision is a tolerance factor used to assess whether an atom is equivalent to another after a symmetry operation up to a maximum distance. A symmetry precision between 10−1 and 10−5 Å is typically used. In the Materials Project database, a symmetry tolerance of 10−1 Å is used for the reported space group stored in the database. We use the same tolerance to generate CIFs sent to the BCS Structure Relations.

We evaluated how varying the symmetry tolerance changes the resolved space group for all the structures in the Materials Project. We were able to determine this efficiently by using a binary search on a log10 scale for a maximum and minimum symmetry tolerance of 10−1 Å and 10−5 Å, respectively. Out of the 67,000 structures we checked, 50,000 (75%) structures were resolved into one distinct space group for the entire symmetry precision range. For additional discussion about the sensitivity of symmetry precision on resulting space groups in the search for ferroelectrics, see refs. 16,62.

DFT calculation details

In our workflow, we perform spin-polarized DFT calculations using the Vienna Ab initio Software Package (VASP) version 5.3.56365. We use the generalized gradient approximation (GGA) functional of Perdew, Burke, and Ernzerhof (PBE)66. Our calculations use PAW pseudopotentials and an energy cutoff of 520 eV for the plane-wave basis67,68; this is 1.3 times the highest cutoff recommended for the pseudopotentials used69. Structures are initialized with ferromagnetic ordering in all cases in this work. Since the default is for parallel alignment of the spins, we expect the workflow to be reliable for nonmagnetic or ferromagnetic materials. Materials with more complicated magnetic ground states, such as antiferromagnets, would require consideration of different antiferromagnetic orderings. Therefore, some common multiferroics possessing antiferromagnetic or near antiferromagnetic ordering may not be identified by this workflow. Extensions to include antiferromagnetic spin arrangements are relegated to future work. These settings correspond to default values used to create the Materials Project database and therefore allow a direct comparison of our results with the Materials Project database.

We use the Berry phase approach from refs. 39,43,44,70,71, as implemented in VASP to calculate the electronic part of the macroscopic spontaneous polarization. We calculate the ionic part of the polarization using the point charge and position for each atom in the unit cell, see the calc_ionic function in pymatgen.analysis.ferroelectricity.polarization for details.

We use the default parameters for VASP inputs as defined in pymatgen (and used by Materials Project) and atomate69,72,73. For details on these parameters, see the documentation for pymatgen.io.vasp.sets.MPStaticSet. We use a Hubbard U correction to correct the DFT-PBE description of d states of select oxides and fluorides following the approach in ref. 74. To see the guidelines for which compounds we apply a U, see refs. 24,69,72,73. We use a reciprocal k-point density of 50 k-points per (1/Å)3 for structural relaxations and 100 k-points per (1/Å)3 for static and polarization calculations. We use total energy convergence criteria of 5 × 10−5 eV per atom for the electronic self-consistent loop and 5 × 10−4 eV/Å per atom for the ionic relaxation loop for structural optimizations. These convergence parameters were tested against higher-accuracy convergence parameters on a set of 182 chemically diverse compounds in ref. 73, yielding total energies within 15 meV/atom and lattice volumes within 7.5% of the higher-accuracy calculations for nearly 96% of the compounds.

We note that while the local density approximation (LDA) is commonly used to describe certain ferroelectric oxides, and therefore to compute their polarizations, use of a generalized gradient approximation (GGA), such as the PBE functional, tends to be standard for wider classes of materials nowadays. PBE is also the default functional used by the Materials Project for structural relaxations and calculating material properties. Thus, we use PBE for this effort. Our results are in line with the typical overestimation of PBE for the lattice parameters, and therefore, we expect a similar overestimation of the polarization. In addition, while DFT-PBE tends to underestimate electronic band gaps, the latter plays a minimal role in the determination of standard ferroelectric materials, and as shown below, will only limit the computation of the spontaneous polarization for a small number of them.

Scientific workflow packages

We construct the scientific workflows to perform the structural relaxations and spin-polarized DFT calculations of energy, band gap, and polarization using the FireWorks and atomate python packages38,75. FireWorks is built for managing computational scientific workflows. atomate is built for constructing workflows for multiple computational material science codes, such as VASP. atomate uses FireWorks classes to develop modules for performing common DFT calculations with VASP, such as structural relaxations and self-consistent calculations of total energy. atomate also provides a framework for building custom modules, which we use to construct our structural interpolations and polarization calculations modules.

DFT workflow

We use the DFT workflow, shown in Fig. 2, to compute the physical properties needed to identify ferroelectric candidates. We perform spin-polarized calculations and for systems with spin-polarized ground states, consider only ferromagnetic ordering. We execute the DFT workflow shown in Fig. 2 for the 413 pairs with continuous nonpolar-polar transformations, with maximum distortions that do not exceed 1.5 Å.

Fig. 2.

Fig. 2

Diagram of DFT workflow written with atomate and Fire Works. Blue and red boxes denote initial nonpolar and polar structures, respectively, green boxes denote DFT calculations, orange rhombuses denote decision steps, and purple ellipses denote exit steps. Black arrows represent passing of data between different software codes. The metallic check for the interpolated structures leads to a similar condition as earlier, where if any of the interpolations are metallic the workflow stops (not illustrated for clarity in figure).

For each structure pair, we begin with the nonpolar structure in the low-symmetry setting (obtained from BCS Structure Relations in the Symmetry Analysis step) and the polar structure. We use the nonpolar structure transformed into the low-symmetry setting so we can perform structure interpolations and polarization calculations across similar lattices. We perform relaxations of the unit cell and atomic positions of both of these structures twice, using a level of convergence similar to what Materials Project uses for its database entries. As mentioned, all calculations are spin-polarized and use PBE, with a Hubbard U correction for systems with non-d0 open-shell cations; our workflow assumes ferromagnetic ordering for all systems. Extensions of our workflows to consider antiferromagnetic and other orderings will be the subject of future work. We then fix the relaxed nonpolar and polar structures, and perform a self-consistent DFT calculation to compute the total energy and band gap. If either the nonpolar structure or polar structure is found to be metallic at the DFT-PBE level in our spin-polarized calculations initialized with ferromagnetic orderings and a standard U–here we define metallic as having a DFT-PBE band gap of less than 10 meV–we stop the workflow for that structure pair.

If the polar and nonpolar structures are both insulating, we compute the polarization along the distortion path. As shown in Table 1, 80 of the 413 structure pairs were computed to have metallic endpoints in our spin-polarized calculations: 30 were found to have a metallic nonpolar structure but insulating polar structure, 2 were found to have a metallic polar structure but insulating nonpolar structure, and 24 were found to have both metallic polar and nonpolar structures. 24 additional structures have at least a metallic nonpolar structure, but these workflows were halted before the polar structures had their band gaps computed.

We compute the DFT total energy, band gap, and polarization of eight evenly-distributed linearly-interpolated structure, or interpolations, of the nonpolar to polar structures. We found eight interpolations to be sufficient for reconstructing a smooth polarization trend for at least 75% of our candidates. Similiar to the previous step where a metallic calculation causes the workflow to stop, metallic interpolations similarly halt the workflow since we would be unable to calculate the polarization of that structure. 59 candidates were found to have metallic interpolations. The DFT workflow is labeled as complete when all polarization calculations along the path have completed. As shown in Table 1, 255 structure pairs successfully completed the workflow, and satisfy our requirements of a ferroelectric phase transition.

Post-processing spontaneous polarization values

As discussed earlier, only polar space groups are compatible with a polarization vector that is not integer or half integer multiples of the polarization quantum46. If a reference nonpolar structure that is continuously deformable into the polar structure can be identified, we can then calculate the polarization of several interpolated structures between the reference nonpolar and the target ferroelectric polar structure. The nonpolar structure is used as a means to calculate the spontaneous polarization; however, we note in general it is not necessary for the nonpolar structure to be experimentally observable for the polar material to be ferroelectric.

We start by calculating the formal polarization of the nonpolar structure, which is either zero or a half quantum of polarization (modulo the quantum of polarization) along the three lattice directions. Then we perform the same calculation for the first interpolated structure along the distortion, and then the next, until we arrive at the final polar structure. For a sufficient number of interpolations between the nonpolar and polar structures, we can trace out smooth, continuous polarization “paths” along the distortion; there will be infinitely many paths due to the periodicity of the polarization lattice. Subtracting the polarization values at the nonpolar and the polar endpoints of the same path or “branch” will give us the spontaneous polarization vector of the polar ferroelectric phase.

We perform the following steps to recover the same branch “proper” polarization, which is independent of choice of branch. The first step, which is crucial, is to readjust the polarization for each structure along the distortion to be in the polar polarization lattice. To do this, we modify the polarization of the intermediate structures by the ratio of the quantum of polarizations of the two lattices (the lattice parameters divided by the volume multiplied by the electron charge), i.e.,

Pη,i(polarlattice)=Pη,iRpolar,i/ΩpolarRη,i/Ωη, 2

where Rη,i and Ωη are the lattice parameters and volume of the ηth structure along the distortion, Rpolar and Ωpolar are the lattice parameters and volume of the polar structure, and i is a lattice direction â, b^ or ĉ. If we do not perform this adjustment, we are calculating what is called the “improper polarization” which will depend on the choice of branch and is therefore unphysical76. See Fig. 3 for an example of the differences between proper and improper polarization for BaTiO3 (here we use conventional notation for the name).

Fig. 3.

Fig. 3

Examples of improper (left) and proper (right) polarization curves for BaTiO3 along the ĉ direction versus distortion from the nonpolar to polar structure, showing the importance of calculating the proper polarization. Due to the change in lattice parameters and volume across the distortion, the quantum of polarization defined for each structure along the ĉ direction is different. Using these different quanta causes the improper spontaneous polarization predicted by different branches to differ, as can be seen in the polarization values given in the right of the image. In contrast for the proper polarization (right), we re-scale the polarization of each intermediate structure to be in the polar structure’s polarization lattice and use the quantum of polarization as defined by the polar structure. This results in predictions that are branch independent, which is what we use to assess candidates. Note that while, in this specific case, the calculated polarization values for all interpolations were on the same branch, this need not generally be the case.

After adjusting our initial polarizations, we then construct a periodic lattice with lengths and angles corresponding to the quantum of polarization along each polar lattice direction; this corresponds to the second term of Eq. (1). For the polarization lattice, the lengths of the lattice vectors are the cell lattice vectors divided by the volume of the unit cell and multiplied by conversion factors for electron charge and length scale.

Our algorithm for adjusting the polarizations to be on the same branch is depicted in Fig. 4. First, we take the nonpolar polarization (adjusted to be in the polar polarization lattice), and choose the “image” (or periodic value) of the polarization value in the nonpolar polarization lattice that is closest to the Cartesian origin (0, 0, 0). The value of the nonpolar polarization along â, b^, and ĉ can either be zero or a half-quantum. Then, we find the image of the first interpolation polarization value (again adjusted to be in the polar polarization lattice) that is closest to the Cartesian coordinates of the adjusted nonpolar polarization value. We continue this process until we get to the polarization of the polar structure.

Fig. 4.

Fig. 4

A visual demonstration of the same branch polarization algorithm demonstrated in one-dimension (rather than three-dimensions) using BaTiO3. The values for the polarization for each interpolation are those circled in red. In the first panel, we adjust the nonpolar polarization to be on the branch closest to zero. In the second panel, we move the first interpolated polarization to be on the branch closest to the adjusted nonpolar polarization. In the third panel, we adjust the second interpolated polarization to be on the branch closest to the first interpolation polarization. If the algorithm finishes successfully, all the adjusted polarizations will be on the same branch.

This algorithm will find the polarization path with the smallest difference between polarizations of subsequent interpolations. An issue is that this algorithm can incorrectly find the same branch polarization in cases where the change in polarization between interpolations is larger than the quantum of polarization between branches. One example of this type of failure is the polarization resolved for CrO3 with search ID 187, see Fig. 5 (the search ID being a simplified unique identifier, defined for the purposes of our work, for pairs of structures used in our workflow search, see Online-only Table 3). In this example, the algorithm chooses a discontinuous path that has a smaller spontaneous polarization of 78.2 μC/cm2 in red. However, the correct path uses the last three interpolations in the branch shown with a dashed red line and gives a polarization of 122.9 μC/cm2. To correctly reconstruct this polarization with our existing algorithm, more structures would be needed to better interpolate between the nonpolar and polar structures. Alternatively, the curvature of the spline connecting nonpolar and polar structures could be used to identify points on the same branch; we leave this refinement for future work.

Fig. 5.

Fig. 5

The polarization reconstruction for CrO3 with search ID 187. The polarization along the b lattice parameter is incorrectly reconstructed because the different polarization branches are closer than the change in polarization between structure interpolations.

Online-only Table 3.

Search ID, alphabetical formula, Materials Project ID and Workflow IDs for high quality candidates.

Search ID Alphabetical Formula as formatted in Materials Project database Polar MP ID Nonpolar MP ID Workflow ID
1 Ag10Br3Te4 mp-568386 mp-568392 wfid_1562345081.92745142
2 Ag2BiO3 mp-561113 mp-558712 wfid_1562345066.59186560
3 Ag2BiO3 mp-23558 mp-558712 wfid_1562345080.63153360
4 Ag2O4W mp-637188 mp-504466 wfid_1562345080.72611869
5 Ag2S mp-560025 mp-556225 wfid_1562345112.11438196
6 Ag2S mp-560025 mp-36216 wfid_1562345112.31901092
7 Ag2S mp-560025 mp-32791 wfid_1562345112.28048731
8 Ag2S mp-38511 mp-32791 wfid_1562345109.86187522
9 Ag2S mp-32669 mp-36216 wfid_1562345080.93250415
10 Ag2S mp-32669 mp-32791 wfid_1562345081.72797057
11 Ag3IS mp-675879 mp-676561 wfid_1562345089.24703674
12 Ag3IS mp-675879 mp-558189 wfid_1562345097.63538177
13 Ag3IS mp-22995 mp-676561 wfid_1562345085.94165367
14 Ag3IS mp-22995 mp-558189 wfid_1562345089.76230197
15 AgAl11O17 mp-849760 mp-766293 wfid_1562345083.68955336
16 AgAlO3 mvc-3476 mvc-15935 wfid_1562345112.91840254
17 AgC2O2 mp-600237 mp-654937 wfid_1562345064.01802743
18 Al2BaO4 mp-4202 mp-619456 wfid_1562345097.07894293
19 Al2BaO4 mp-4202 mp-3828 wfid_1562345097.68976538
20 Al2CaH4O10Si2 mp-24603 mp-733653 wfid_1562345079.80563577
21 Al3F19Pb5 mp-541732 mp-557911 wfid_1562345086.15212454
22 Al4La mp-571423 mp-21109 wfid_1562345105.73961799
23 AlBiO3 mp-551918 mp-23080 wfid_1562345104.79543572
24 AlBiO3 mvc-3494 mvc-13972 wfid_1562345095.70366936
25 AlCH2NaO5 mp-699136 mp-644506 wfid_1562345113.04187974
26 AlCl4Hg2Sb mp-570828 mp-568001 wfid_1562345074.60128275
27 AlCoO3 mvc-3774 mvc-13532 wfid_1562345095.84764302
28 AlCrO3 mvc-3775 mvc-13996 wfid_1562345097.53150367
29 AlCuO3 mvc-3501 mvc-15945 wfid_1562345104.05261108
30 AlF7MgNa2 mp-19931 mp-6319 wfid_1562345084.84452891
31 AlH3O3 mp-625318 mp-625316 wfid_1562345113.85119430
32 AlH3O3 mp-626435 mp-626414 wfid_1562199295.69225680
33 AlH3O3 mp-626587 mp-626605 wfid_1562345066.90756711
34 AlMnO3 mvc-3777 mvc-15992 wfid_1562345104.31488404
35 AlMo4S8 mp-554868 mp-3861 wfid_1562345097.39878133
36 AlMo4S8 mvc-16083 mp-3861 wfid_1562345099.89947666
37 AlMoO3 mvc-3779 mvc-14006 wfid_1562345104.48448591
38 AlN mp-661 mp-13178 wfid_1562345088.40370432
39 AlNiO3 mvc-3776 mvc-14043 wfid_1562345104.16630482
40 AlO3Ti mvc-3466 mvc-13964 wfid_1562345113.24875150
41 As2NiTm2 mp-568266 mp-11581 wfid_1562345088.19078870
42 AsNi mp-590 mp-2346 wfid_1562345096.13686232
43 AuCl4K mp-27181 mp-568986 wfid_1562345066.70855532
44 AuTe2 mp-571547 mp-567525 wfid_1562345104.42703805
45 B13C2Li mp-638070 mp-655591 wfid_1562345084.34740380
46 B2K3Nb3O12 mp-557711 mp-15248 wfid_1562345108.76820757
47 B2O6Zn3 mp-559949 mp-542833 wfid_1562345069.20163833
48 B3CaH5O8 mp-560899 mp-705495 wfid_1562345061.85187620
49 B7BrMn3O13 mp-579836 mp-567153 wfid_1562345110.99651178
50 B7ClCr3O13 mp-579770 mp-566691 wfid_1562345108.33484522
51 B7ClMg3O13 mp-23087 mp-23617 wfid_1562345107.17640773
52 B7IMn3O13 mp-31917 mp-565322 wfid_1562345099.25830051
53 BC2N mp-629458 mp-1008523 wfid_1562345103.49034383
54 BCoLi2O4 mp-761299 mp-771049 wfid_1562345117.22594957
55 Ba2Co4Nd2O11 mp-561781 mp-24879 wfid_1562345070.07733415
56 Ba2CrO4 mp-566511 mp-19703 wfid_1562345076.48947736
57 Ba2F7Y mp-768350 mp-777744 wfid_1562345060.94342955
58 Ba3C5Ce2F2O15 mp-667381 mp-581090 wfid_1562199296.78790598
59 BaC2CaO6 mp-644852 mp-6568 wfid_1562199296.60378780
60 BaCO3 mp-762225 mp-34195 wfid_1562199296.73456920
61 BaCl5La mp-770427 mp-770125 wfid_1562345112.71860945
62 BaEuFe2O5 mp-639347 mp-656144 wfid_1562345085.29703104
63 BaFe2S4 mp-675078 mp-27660 wfid_1562345085.09598476
64 BaFe2S4 mp-675078 mp-676036 wfid_1562345085.23366390
65 BaMnO3 mp-19267 mp-19156 wfid_1562345090.52467225
66 BaNiO3 mp-19241 mp-19138 wfid_1562345089.13746210
67 BaO3Ti mp-995191 mp-19990 wfid_1562345103.16533381
68 BaO3Ti mp-5777 mp-2998 wfid_1562345097.33024928
69 BaO3Ti mp-12992 mp-2998 wfid_1562345085.34572722
70 BaO3Ti mp-5986 mp-2998 wfid_1562345085.18772603
71 BaO3Ti mp-5020 mp-2998 wfid_1562345096.05165490
72 BaO5Ti2 mp-555966 mp-3943 wfid_1562345063.80485743
73 BaS3V mp-3451 mp-4227 wfid_1562345096.68042421
74 BaSe3V mp-676597 mp-27363 wfid_1562345111.62539924
75 BeF4H8N2 mp-24614 mp-604245 wfid_1562345113.37855627
76 BeF4H8N2 mp-24614 mp-720982 wfid_1562345114.26291952
77 Bi2MoO6 mp-25708 mp-567075 wfid_1562345072.07030301
78 Bi2MoO6 mp-25708 mp-567326 wfid_1562345072.66801127
79 Bi2Nb2O9Pb mp-583454 mp-23101 wfid_1562345096.76465275
80 Bi2O9SrTa2 mp-23089 mp-554675 wfid_1562345092.91429073
81 Bi2O9SrTa2 mp-559951 mp-554675 wfid_1562345093.12462394
82 Bi4O12Ti3 mp-723064 mp-23335 wfid_1562345067.21007940
83 Bi4O12Ti3 mp-23427 mp-23335 wfid_1562345115.68239992
84 Bi4O12Ti3 mp-622198 mp-23335 wfid_1562345090.67222161
85 BiCl8F4H3K6 mp-696998 mp-723540 wfid_1562345088.64692719
86 BiCuO8W2 mp-565192 mp-615173 wfid_1562199296.16002539
87 BiCuYb mp-22953 mp-22960 wfid_1562345089.00815378
88 BiFeO3 mp-601706 mp-561388 wfid_1562345117.60950601
89 BiFeO3 mp-24942 mp-561388 wfid_1562345068.96362730
90 BiFeO3 mp-24932 mp-561388 wfid_1562345095.33810901
91 BiInO3 mp-556892 mp-561102 wfid_1562345078.25607094
92 BiInO3 mp-556892 mp-545379 wfid_1562345104.93967568
93 BiO2 mvc-9645 mp-32548 wfid_1562345101.07858072
94 BiO3Sc mp-555313 mp-555769 wfid_1562345069.03136189
95 BiO3Sc mp-555313 mp-550008 wfid_1562345104.65432837
96 BiO3Y mvc-3479 mvc-15941 wfid_1562345100.97005996
97 Br3CsGe mp-642739 mp-570223 wfid_1562345114.09410592
98 Br3MnRb mp-568231 mp-29763 wfid_1562345090.03425890
99 Br3RbV mp-29314 mp-570099 wfid_1562345089.82930048
100 Br4K2Zn mp-23535 mp-23495 wfid_1562199296.55106864
101 BrH mp-632229 mp-634105 wfid_1562345082.80546132
102 BrH mp-632229 mp-23903 wfid_1562345083.08491158
103 BrMnSbSe2 mp-639335 mp-655834 wfid_1562345065.32859164
104 C2CoLi2O6 mp-765126 mp-763828 wfid_1562345060.79723600
105 C2CoLi2O6 mp-765128 mp-763828 wfid_1562345060.64209065
106 C2HO2 mp-675395 mp-23680 wfid_1562345111.73469268
107 C2HgN2S2 mp-610992 mp-655275 wfid_1562345063.29510504
108 C3ClH10NO4 mp-554570 mp-560498 wfid_1562199296.21214937
109 C6Cu2H10N4S3 mp-600236 mp-555729 wfid_1562345061.28565377
110 CCs4O4 mp-562815 mp-605824 wfid_1562345090.37034900
111 CH4N2S mp-721896 mp-23930 wfid_1562345071.44504562
112 CHO2Tl mp-558579 mp-557687 wfid_1562345073.70348192
113 CK4O4 mp-551561 mp-549687 wfid_1562345114.85602856
114 CK4O4 mp-551561 mp-549869 wfid_1562345064.72820430
115 CK4O4 mp-605843 mp-549869 wfid_1562345067.39360264
116 CK4O4 mp-545387 mp-551736 wfid_1562345092.46694443
117 CK4O4 mp-545630 mp-551736 wfid_1562345091.11202201
118 CLi4O4 mp-550320 mp-551740 wfid_1562345109.75844212
119 CLi4O4 mp-550320 mp-551848 wfid_1562345064.64947472
120 CLi4O4 mp-550498 mp-551740 wfid_1562345095.95394592
121 CLi4O4 mp-550593 mp-546202 wfid_1562345093.97216898
122 CN2Pb mp-619032 mp-19727 wfid_1562345077.98674939
123 CNa4O4 mp-13274 mp-546551 wfid_1562345064.95566356
124 CNa4O4 mp-13274 mp-546707 wfid_1562345116.92380413
125 CNa4O4 mp-645295 mp-551886 wfid_1562345106.21088335
126 CNa4O4 mp-552623 mp-551886 wfid_1562345091.53870848
127 CNa4O4 mp-552941 mp-551886 wfid_1562345092.72215049
128 CO4Rb4 mp-551176 mp-550679 wfid_1562345106.35940545
129 CO4Rb4 mp-551176 mp-547898 wfid_1562345115.59588544
130 CO4Rb4 mp-551176 mp-545760 wfid_1562345065.02973794
131 CO4Rb4 mp-550314 mp-546320 wfid_1562345091.36271002
132 CO4Rb4 mp-551690 mp-546320 wfid_1562345111.91150344
133 Ca2FeO6W mvc-12913 mp-619611 wfid_1562345117.46280857
134 Ca3Mn2O7 mp-19042 mp-19610 wfid_1562345081.50183207
135 Ca3Mn2O7 mvc-11576 mp-19610 wfid_1562345099.00022301
136 Ca3Mn2O7 mp-19042 mp-19124 wfid_1562345100.32022475
137 Ca3Mn2O7 mvc-11576 mp-19124 wfid_1562345098.61366590
138 Ca5ClO12P3 mp-39460 mp-554236 wfid_1562345087.78522502
139 CaF2 mp-560030 mp-554355 wfid_1562345100.02925969
140 CaFe2O4 mvc-12582 mvc-8188 wfid_1562345116.80707800
141 CaFe2O4 mvc-12583 mvc-8188 wfid_1562345117.00610059
142 CaFeO6W mvc-10916 mvc-14934 wfid_1562345116.27690236
143 CaNi2O4 mvc-12644 mvc-7742 wfid_1562345116.53277296
144 Cd2ClP3 mp-29246 mp-644431 wfid_1562345068.11764927
145 CdCl2 mp-632403 mp-695850 wfid_1562345118.41939438
146 CdO3Ti mp-20940 mp-14550 wfid_1562345071.77195440
147 CdO3Ti mp-5052 mp-14550 wfid_1562345078.17038961
148 CdTe mp-685146 mp-1008471 wfid_1562345102.26130693
149 CdTe mp-685146 mp-2388 wfid_1562345082.98370782
150 CeCu4Sn mp-640286 mp-655580 wfid_1562345115.39463102
151 CeCuSn mp-22683 mp-22761 wfid_1562345088.97236356
152 CeKS4Si mp-22809 mp-11170 wfid_1562199297.04974693
153 Cl2H8MgO12 mp-989229 mp-865188 wfid_1562345063.58842327
154 Cl3CoTl mp-567430 mp-569753 wfid_1562345112.15249459
155 Cl3CrCs mp-610955 mp-570326 wfid_1562345089.18755185
156 Cl3CrRb mp-568864 mp-568887 wfid_1562345089.52001267
157 Cl3CrRb mp-568864 mp-30027 wfid_1562345064.81349297
158 Cl3CsPb mp-675524 mp-23037 wfid_1562345092.64050822
159 Cl3CuRb mp-571305 mp-568857 wfid_1562345064.33652828
160 Cl3CuRb mp-571305 mp-569526 wfid_1562345108.13574082
161 Cl4CoRb2 mp-571242 mp-23076 wfid_1562345075.90964892
162 Cl4GaHg2Sb mp-568031 mp-571190 wfid_1562345074.87030107
163 Cl4K2Zn mp-653633 mp-653454 wfid_1562345109.96773133
164 Cl4K2Zn mp-618177 mp-653454 wfid_1562345075.60077746
165 Cl4K2Zn mp-647575 mp-653454 wfid_1562345106.46698464
166 Cl4Rb2Zn mp-568350 mp-608314 wfid_1562345106.82651466
167 Cl4Rb2Zn mp-616185 mp-608314 wfid_1562345076.32521814
168 Cl8Na2Ti3 mp-569978 mp-29474 wfid_1562345086.01893685
169 ClH mp-632326 mp-634101 wfid_1562345118.36325774
170 ClH mp-632326 mp-23722 wfid_1562345083.03981015
171 ClH mp-684609 mp-634101 wfid_1562345116.34885480
172 ClH3O5 mp-625175 mp-625148 wfid_1562345076.84195890
173 ClH4NO4 mp-698084 mp-706586 wfid_1562345077.01048358
174 ClIn mp-571636 mp-571555 wfid_1562345080.19562594
175 CoLi2O4Si mp-764958 mp-764956 wfid_1562345093.33885886
176 CoLiO4P mp-761753 mp-18915 wfid_1562345062.80425054
177 CoLiO4P mp-761753 mp-761979 wfid_1562345062.56056403
178 CoN mvc-15478 mp-1009078 wfid_1562345115.48425255
179 CoO3Y mvc-3765 mvc-3570 wfid_1562345101.77376431
180 CoO6Si2 mvc-12012 mvc-11366 wfid_1562345116.15943930
181 CoO6Si2 mvc-15005 mvc-11366 wfid_1562345116.64943193
182 Cr2S3 mp-849081 mp-555569 wfid_1562345085.83637119
183 CrI3Rb mp-27442 mp-676553 wfid_1562345107.98049651
184 CrLi3O4 mp-770632 mp-777303 wfid_1562345073.19170804
185 CrLiO4P mp-761391 mp-25507 wfid_1562345097.86901705
186 CrLiO4P mp-761399 mp-761401 wfid_1562345079.39507654
187 CrO3 mvc-13134 mp-779986 wfid_1562345115.52822945
188 CrO3 mp-779941 mp-779986 wfid_1562345077.57898854
189 CrO3 mvc-13999 mvc-11097 wfid_1562345100.48228079
190 CrO3Y mvc-3768 mvc-3569 wfid_1562345101.55871265
191 CrO9P3 mp-566776 mp-566761 wfid_1562345068.26681921
192 Cs2HgI4 mp-567594 mp-28421 wfid_1562199296.32626762
193 Cs2N2Tb6Te7 mp-646007 mp-655613 wfid_1562345117.74137700
194 Cs2O3Pb mp-21521 mp-21283 wfid_1562345081.30847872
195 CsF3Pb mp-20282 mp-5811 wfid_1562345093.87340147
196 CsO4PZn mp-559752 mp-18673 wfid_1562345078.54041242
197 Cu2Se mp-684653 mp-22297 wfid_1562345109.82599426
198 Cu3Mo2O9 mp-649957 mp-639719 wfid_1562345076.59705060
199 Cu4LiO12P3 mp-761193 mp-26741 wfid_1562345069.50145207
200 Cu8O mp-704745 mp-31217 wfid_1562345083.27533748
201 CuF4Li2 mp-753171 mp-753123 wfid_1562345117.37566277
202 CuGeLi2 mp-676117 mp-35841 wfid_1562345108.71707409
203 CuGeYb mp-567768 mp-5111 wfid_1562345089.04666899
204 CuI mp-673245 mp-22895 wfid_1562199296.66891517
205 CuLiO4P mp-769278 mp-758750 wfid_1562345103.23786212
206 CuLiO4P mp-757209 mp-25449 wfid_1562345080.06677653
207 CuLiO4P mp-752507 mp-758750 wfid_1562345079.49749416
208 CuN mvc-13841 mp-1008922 wfid_1562345115.20318466
209 CuSbYb mp-11701 mp-9439 wfid_1562345089.09864953
210 Er2F7K mp-27925 mp-558238 wfid_1562345077.72055408
211 Eu2GeSe4 mp-629088 mp-505740 wfid_1562199296.49909393
212 F2HRb mp-677103 mp-29764 wfid_1562345084.74762742
213 F2Pb mp-685150 mp-315 wfid_1562345083.62247248
214 F3Nd mp-18511 mp-18074 wfid_1562345088.07662185
215 F3PbRb mp-674508 mp-21043 wfid_1562345118.45837326
216 F4FeLi mp-777891 mp-778352 wfid_1562345073.27618989
217 F4FeLi2 mp-777471 mp-777588 wfid_1562345079.15751718
218 F4Li2OV mp-764695 mp-780857 wfid_1562345081.19754088
219 F4LiV mp-764895 mp-766952 wfid_1562345091.69966218
220 F4MgSr mp-561022 mp-556290 wfid_1562345060.28720726
221 F5FeK2 mp-579331 mp-555882 wfid_1562345075.11835588
222 F5H2Li2OV mp-868263 mp-770536 wfid_1562345112.83065051
223 F5V mp-765140 mvc-14312 wfid_1562345115.11396023
224 F5V mp-766786 mvc-14312 wfid_1562345115.26181400
225 F6LiV mp-765122 mp-765966 wfid_1562345101.99111429
226 F7FeNa2Ni mp-566483 mp-558817 wfid_1562345084.18504979
227 F7LiMn2 mp-765204 mp-763085 wfid_1562345061.66535445
228 FNbO2 mp-752467 mp-35171 wfid_1562345068.05041391
229 FTl mp-558134 mp-2175 wfid_1562345083.57628883
230 Fe2Li3O12P3 mp-762728 mp-853256 wfid_1562199295.93469828
231 Fe2O4Zn mvc-12661 mvc-15076 wfid_1562345116.41517559
232 Fe3O4 mp-612405 mp-715614 wfid_1562345066.80008603
233 Fe3O4 mp-715275 mp-541907 wfid_1562345071.34228519
234 Fe3O4 mp-715275 mp-18731 wfid_1562345071.67063249
235 Fe4LiO12P3 mp-762896 mp-540020 wfid_1562345069.75195107
236 Fe7S8 mp-850411 mp-685128 wfid_1562345061.12554914
237 FeHO2 mp-625314 mp-625269 wfid_1562345062.25044610
238 FeHO2 mp-625314 mp-605437 wfid_1562345062.47321464
239 FeHO2 mp-625268 mp-625233 wfid_1562345077.64486953
240 FeHO2 mp-625268 mp-605437 wfid_1562345078.08008077
241 FeHO2 mp-626102 mp-743660 wfid_1562345081.65293768
242 FeLi2O4Si mp-764344 mp-762566 wfid_1562345092.81949641
243 FeLiO4P mp-762593 mp-765913 wfid_1562345099.64867399
244 FeLiO4P mp-766763 mp-765913 wfid_1562345079.60737271
245 FeLiO4Si mp-766664 mp-762643 wfid_1562345118.01517942
246 FeO2 mvc-12125 mp-25519 wfid_1562345100.60371473
247 FeO3Sc mp-771123 mp-769970 wfid_1562345089.93657805
248 FeO3Y mvc-3751 mvc-3556 wfid_1562345097.97802299
249 GaLuO3 mp-768505 mp-755342 wfid_1562345094.09550293
250 GaMo4S8 mp-559694 mp-2885 wfid_1562345089.31591687
251 GaMo4Se8 mp-567394 mp-5584 wfid_1562345096.94387271
252 GaN5O14 mp-541950 mp-557954 wfid_1562345064.51602404
253 GaO3Sc mp-769079 mp-754165 wfid_1562345093.59972440
254 Gd3O7Os mp-567291 mp-16825 wfid_1562345112.36603552
255 Gd3O7Ru mp-683963 mp-17237 wfid_1562345111.31901335
256 H2KO4P mp-757909 mp-24262 wfid_1562345103.54083952
257 H2KO4P mp-23959 mp-696752 wfid_1562345096.22998438
258 H2Mg mp-569051 mp-23711 wfid_1562345071.87614530
259 H2Mg mp-569051 mp-1008901 wfid_1562345095.28203208
260 H2MoO4 mp-625600 mp-626577 wfid_1562199295.62978167
261 H2MoO4 mp-626582 mp-626577 wfid_1562199296.07296394
262 H2MoO4 mp-626586 mp-626577 wfid_1562199295.77439317
263 H2NiO2 mp-626843 mp-626794 wfid_1562345090.47289757
264 H2O mp-557082 mp-558958 wfid_1562345062.67599870
265 H2O mp-557082 mp-558226 wfid_1562345062.31879317
266 H2O10U3 mp-626114 mp-626104 wfid_1562199295.82524035
267 H2O10U3 mp-626114 mp-626062 wfid_1562199295.87807235
268 H2O2Sr mp-625184 mp-27425 wfid_1562345070.54182585
269 H2O2Sr mp-625184 mp-625191 wfid_1562345070.86402364
270 H2O2Zn mp-625857 mp-625830 wfid_1562345062.14719002
271 H2O4PRb mp-23667 mp-642831 wfid_1562345095.48459868
272 H2O4S mp-625475 mp-690733 wfid_1562345114.14736365
273 H2O4S mp-625445 mp-690733 wfid_1562345068.84228879
274 H2O4S mp-625474 mp-690733 wfid_1562345068.50494058
275 H2O4Sn3 mp-625789 mp-625541 wfid_1562345091.78627029
276 H2O4Te mp-625526 mp-625513 wfid_1562345065.26430213
277 H2O4U mp-626885 mp-626876 wfid_1562345081.78625138
278 H2O4U mp-626885 mp-626864 wfid_1562345082.84911275
279 H3LaO3 mp-625733 mp-625394 wfid_1562345086.50809338
280 H3O3Pr mp-625452 mp-626361 wfid_1562345065.11062718
281 H3O3Pr mp-625452 mp-625447 wfid_1562345065.17991627
282 H3O3Y mp-625677 mp-24076 wfid_1562345086.70080946
283 H3O4P mp-626450 mp-626464 wfid_1562345066.41605572
284 H3O4P mp-626450 mp-626449 wfid_1562345066.26534577
285 H3O4P mp-626450 mp-23902 wfid_1562345065.88747031
286 H4O5S mp-626448 mp-626109 wfid_1562345065.45762179
287 H4O6Sr mp-625836 mp-625812 wfid_1562345067.79383899
288 H4O6Sr mp-625871 mp-625821 wfid_1562345119.03613496
289 H5IO6 mp-625256 mp-625174 wfid_1562345066.04864776
290 H5IO6 mp-625256 mp-27773 wfid_1562345065.65066324
291 H5NO2 mp-625109 mp-625108 wfid_1562345113.93677372
292 H8N2O4S mp-24468 mp-23876 wfid_1562345077.14704718
293 HInO2 mp-504535 mp-632711 wfid_1562345073.13297542
294 HK2NO6S2 mp-695383 mp-706912 wfid_1562345068.66194719
295 HNaO mp-626000 mp-23940 wfid_1562199296.04072234
296 HNaO mp-626000 mp-23891 wfid_1562345093.29957585
297 HNaO mp-625996 mp-23891 wfid_1562345109.01493217
298 HO2V mp-626791 mp-626787 wfid_1562345071.60128680
299 HO2V mp-626791 mp-626796 wfid_1562345071.21174354
300 HORb mp-626721 mp-643043 wfid_1562199296.70345448
301 HfO2 mp-685097 mp-550893 wfid_1562345073.07864623
302 HfO3Pb mp-669414 mp-22734 wfid_1562345073.51183116
303 HfO3Sr mp-13108 mp-4551 wfid_1562345085.42724040
304 ILi6PS5 mp-950995 mp-985582 wfid_1562345070.64579894
305 ILiO3 mp-22955 mp-545343 wfid_1562345088.90631590
306 ILiO3 mp-613442 mp-545343 wfid_1562345088.85588763
307 INaO3 mp-559252 mp-545825 wfid_1562345117.14457677
308 In3Mg mp-973320 mp-973308 wfid_1562345085.05162970
309 K2O4Se mp-557025 mp-5226 wfid_1562345101.21075848
310 K2O7Zn6 mp-559112 mp-540728 wfid_1562345085.70573284
311 K3S4Sb mp-9781 mp-9911 wfid_1562345091.21940324
312 KLaS4Si mp-861938 mp-12924 wfid_1562345060.20349732
313 KNbO3 mp-5246 mp-935811 wfid_1562345096.61294252
314 KNbO3 mp-4342 mp-935811 wfid_1562345085.39184383
315 KNbO3 mp-7375 mp-935811 wfid_1562345096.53537136
316 LaN3W mp-989524 mp-989455 wfid_1562345105.24353733
317 Li2MnO6Si2 mp-764791 mp-767686 wfid_1562345116.00036545
318 Li3Mg mp-976139 mp-976254 wfid_1562345063.43801573
319 LiMn4O12P3 mp-32021 mp-853253 wfid_1562345070.20398004
320 LiMnO2 mp-775531 mp-775236 wfid_1562345089.69436506
321 LiMnO4P mp-690866 mp-868359 wfid_1562345112.01290767
322 LiMnO4P mp-765846 mp-765871 wfid_1562345114.75068713
323 LiMnO4P mp-761551 mp-868359 wfid_1562345078.67804385
324 LiMnO4P mp-766735 mp-868359 wfid_1562345079.01940689
325 LiMnO4P mp-780646 mp-18997 wfid_1562345078.43784085
326 LiMnO4P mp-761562 mp-765871 wfid_1562345098.18604043
327 LiMnO4P mp-766735 mp-31939 wfid_1562345102.64344909
328 LiMnO4P mp-780646 mp-765871 wfid_1562345079.70386079
329 LiMnO4P mp-867520 mp-765871 wfid_1562345080.29869855
330 LiMnO4Si mp-762828 mp-780325 wfid_1562345105.43550629
331 LiNbO3 mp-3731 mp-552588 wfid_1562345086.57526556
332 LiNi4O12P3 mp-868339 mp-868378 wfid_1562345070.95947283
333 LiNiO4P mp-763217 mp-25614 wfid_1562345062.93664125
334 LiNiO4P mp-763217 mp-762173 wfid_1562345063.47200918
335 LiNiO4P mp-763217 mp-761990 wfid_1562345063.14923175
336 LiNiO4P mp-763061 mp-32324 wfid_1562345098.08585876
337 LiNiO4P mp-766636 mp-761990 wfid_1562345102.75577260
338 LiNiO4P mp-772673 mp-761990 wfid_1562345080.47287897
339 LiNiO4P mp-868169 mp-32324 wfid_1562345105.85799320
340 LiO12P3W2 mp-763531 mp-763372 wfid_1562345098.77384901
341 LiO12P3Zr2 mp-681439 mp-541661 wfid_1562345094.48631430
342 LiO4PV mp-765022 mp-761338 wfid_1562345076.06485889
343 LiO4PV mp-765022 mp-32425 wfid_1562345102.34349984
344 LiO4SiV mp-767103 mp-767620 wfid_1562345079.26097922
345 MgN2O6 mp-776410 mp-771046 wfid_1562345119.24225097
346 MgO3Si mp-557803 mp-5026 wfid_1562345075.73274781
347 MgRb3 mp-974981 mp-974940 wfid_1562345084.61541787
348 MnN mvc-13808 mp-1009130 wfid_1562345116.38073018
349 MnO3Y mp-19385 mp-19227 wfid_1562345094.72739682
350 MnO3Y mp-19385 mvc-11553 wfid_1562345094.87268641
351 MnO3Y mvc-16316 mvc-11553 wfid_1562345101.66519989
352 MnO3Y mvc-16316 mp-19227 wfid_1562345100.17508190
353 MoO3 mp-715584 mvc-12752 wfid_1562345118.94396078
354 MoO3 mvc-13534 mvc-11096 wfid_1562345105.14252211
355 MoO3Y mvc-3769 mvc-3559 wfid_1562345101.88114837
356 N2O6Zn mp-778973 mp-772617 wfid_1562345118.64838432
357 N3Na mp-634410 mp-570538 wfid_1562345117.90645376
358 N6Pb mp-620058 mp-667338 wfid_1562345078.78578590
359 NOs mp-999317 mp-1009496 wfid_1562345106.31147985
360 NaNbO3 mp-4681 mp-4419 wfid_1562345096.42937982
361 NaNbO3 mp-558920 mp-3671 wfid_1562345071.93467738
362 NaNbO3 mp-558920 mp-559354 wfid_1562345072.89491942
363 NaO11V6 mp-567072 mp-510616 wfid_1562345107.63740338
364 NaO11V6 mp-25156 mp-510616 wfid_1562345088.44942336
365 NbO4Sb mp-3491 mp-3612 wfid_1562345074.16515924
366 NbO5P mp-556918 mp-5803 wfid_1562345078.33658421
367 NiO3Y mvc-3773 mvc-14342 wfid_1562345102.14561677
368 O11PbV6 mp-619128 mp-25790 wfid_1562345088.26528020
369 O13V7 mp-715598 mp-556332 wfid_1562199296.38256579
370 O23Rb6Si10 mp-27376 mp-561189 wfid_1562345094.99343391
371 O23Rb6Si10 mp-555837 mp-561189 wfid_1562345094.24965045
372 O2Sb mp-230 mp-560098 wfid_1562345073.78468145
373 O2Si mp-555891 mp-7648 wfid_1562345105.66292123
374 O2Si mp-555891 mp-559091 wfid_1562345063.38077530
375 O2Si mp-972808 mp-559091 wfid_1562345063.09303946
376 O2Si mp-553881 mp-10948 wfid_1562345104.59178493
377 O2Si mp-553881 mp-10064 wfid_1562345067.15640753
378 O2Si mp-557881 mp-558351 wfid_1562345067.50179482
379 O2Si mp-555235 mp-7087 wfid_1562345099.15877093
380 O2Si mp-554089 mp-10948 wfid_1562345074.54062829
381 O2Si mp-554089 mp-7905 wfid_1562345080.24041294
382 O2Si mp-554089 mp-10064 wfid_1562345080.41388803
383 O2Si mp-16964 mp-560826 wfid_1562345082.41349074
384 O2Si mp-556218 mp-560826 wfid_1562345083.35483635
385 O2Si mp-557264 mp-559313 wfid_1562345083.13307328
386 O2Si mp-554946 mp-644923 wfid_1562345086.82500871
387 O2V mp-715553 mp-714880 wfid_1562345090.13953873
388 O2Zr mp-556605 mp-1565 wfid_1562345072.21799631
389 O3PbTi mp-20459 mp-19845 wfid_1562345085.47191419
390 O3PbZr mp-647557 mp-542903 wfid_1562345073.88793953
391 O3SbY mvc-3460 mvc-14740 wfid_1562345100.87211791
392 O3ScY mp-769007 mp-768479 wfid_1562345093.42856192
393 O3SnY mvc-3464 mvc-13971 wfid_1562345100.77015926
394 O3Te mvc-14734 mvc-14413 wfid_1562345105.02231844
395 O3TiY mvc-3431 mvc-13995 wfid_1562345100.06969004
396 O3V2 mp-553955 mp-715514 wfid_1562345067.95646032
397 O3V2 mp-553955 mp-714906 wfid_1562345118.53916482
398 O3VY mvc-3770 mvc-13691 wfid_1562345103.93946099
399 O3W mp-32662 mp-559175 wfid_1562345090.19555210
400 O3W mp-32662 mp-715590 wfid_1562345090.28098999
401 O3W mp-32662 mp-32777 wfid_1562345087.96868747
402 O3W mvc-13988 mvc-11457 wfid_1562345101.46683505
403 O3WY mvc-3772 mvc-15989 wfid_1562345103.36826836
404 O5PTiTl mp-6706 mp-559607 wfid_1562345074.29488196
405 O7OsSm3 mp-555639 mp-5447 wfid_1562345109.33811762
406 O7RuSm3 mp-555525 mp-5779 wfid_1562345109.06349917
407 O7Sr2Ta2 mp-13664 mp-12286 wfid_1562345080.99369532
408 O8W3 mp-715557 mp-19066 wfid_1562345114.96113485
409 OPb mp-550714 mp-20878 wfid_1562345071.55443872
410 PSn mp-7526 mp-475 wfid_1562345111.58481907
411 PtU mp-542817 mp-569752 wfid_1562345098.53781532
412 Te5U mp-651772 mp-28500 wfid_1562345077.40124852
413 U mp-43 mp-93 wfid_1562345085.52036650

Graphical interface

To view the DFT ferroelectric candidate data in aggregate, we create an interactive web site for viewing polarization and total energy plots, animations of the distortion, and other data. The interface consists of two main pages: (1) a page containing a sortable table of ferroelectric candidates organized by category (whether the candidate had a value of polarization successfully calculated and if so with what level of confidence) and (2) individual candidate pages that show energy and polarization plots, distortion animations, and other data specific to that candidate. This interface is available at https://blondegeek.github.io/ferroelectric_search_site/.

Data Records

This dataset is available as two JSON files deposited in figshare77 and our GitHub repository (http://github.com/blondegeek/ferroelectric_search_site)78. The JSON files provide details of the symmetry analysis performed for each candidate and data generated by DFT calculations and post-processing from the workflow. Zipped folders of the input and output VASP files for each candidate deposited in figshare77. The title of the zipped folder includes the workflow ID to correlate the VASP files to information in the JSON files provided. We also provide an interface for viewing the dataset at http://blondegeek.github.io/ferroelectric_search_site with the code for the interface located at http://github.com/blondegeek/ferroelectric_search_site.

File format

We contribute the following data:

  1. JSON file with information on workflow status of each calculated candidate and calculation details extracted from VASP inputs and outputs. This includes total energy, band gap, polarization, post-processed information, and validation criteria for candidates with completed calculation. See Tables 2 and 3 for details.

  2. JSON file with information describing all 413 nonpolar-polar structure pairs with group-subgroup relations compatible with a second-order phase transition in the Materials Project determined with BCS Structure Relations and used in this search. See Tables 4 and 5 for details.

  3. Zipped folders with the VASP 5.3.5 INCAR, KPOINTS, OUTCAR, and POSCAR files.

Table 2.

Key, value data type, and value description for workflow_data.json entries.

Key Type Description
_id bson.objectid.ObjectId Automatically created unique identifier. 
wfid unicode The workflow id.
cid unicode The “connection” or distortion id. The alphanumeric portion of the string after cid_ corresponds to the bson.objectid.ObjectId used in the distortion database.
search_id unicode Simplified unique identifier for pairs of structures used in the search.
workflow_status unicode Status of workflow denoted by FireWorks.
alphabetical_formula unicode Composition with elements sorted alphabetically.
pretty_formula unicode Composition with elements sorted by electronegativity.
polar_id unicode Materials Project Id.
nonpolar_id unicode Materials Project Id.
polar_icsd_ids floats list ICSD id numbers, if available.
nonpolar_icsd_ids floats list ICSD id numbers, if available.
polar_spacegroup float Polar space group, integer between 1 and 230.
nonpolar_spacegroup float Nonpolar space group, integer between 1 and 230.
orig_polar_structure pymatgen.Structure dict Polar structure as referenced in distortion JSON file.
orig_nonpolar_structure pymatgen.Structure dict Nonpolar structure as referenced in distortion JSON file.
structures pymatgen.Structure dicts list Static calculation structures. Fully complete workflows have 10.
relaxation_len float Number of relaxation calculations performed. Fully complete workflows have 2.
relaxation_task_labels strs list The task labels of the relaxation calculations performed.
static_len float Number of static calculations performed. Fully complete workflows have 10.
static_task_labels strs list The task labels of the static calculations performed.
polarization_len float Number of polarization calculations performed. Fully complete workflows have 10.
polarization_task_labels strs list The task labels of the polarization calculations performed.
polarization_change_norm float The Cartesian norm of the recovered spontaneous polarization.
polarization_change floats list The vector along a, b, and c of the recovered spontaneous polarization vector.
raw_electron_polarization floats lists list Raw electron polarization per structure from VASP along Cartesian directions.
raw_ionic_polarization_vasp floats lists list Raw ionic polarization per structure from VASP along Cartesian directions.
raw_ionic_polarization floats lists list Raw ionic polarization per structure from calc_ionic along lattice directions.
polarization_quanta floats lists list Structure dependent polarization quanta along a, b, and c lattice vectors.
same_branch_polarization floats lists list Same branch polarization along a, b, and c for each polarization calculation structure.
polarization_max_spline_jumps floats lists list Max jump between spline and data for polarization along a, b, and c.
polarization_smoothness floats list Average jump between spline and data for polarization along a, b, and c.

Table 3.

Key, value data type, and value description for workflow_data.json entries continued.

Key Type Description
energies floats list Energy in eV for each static calculation structure.
energies_per_atom floats list Energy per atom in eV for each static calculation structure.
energies_per_atom_max_spline_jumps float Max jump between spline and data for energy per atom.
energies_per_atom_smoothness float Average jump between spline and data for energy per atom.
calculated_max_distance float Calculated max distortion distance. Compare to dmax in distortion.json entries.
zval_dict dict dict with keys of species and values of ZVAL in number of electrons.
hubbards dict dict with keys of species and values of Hubbard U correction in eV pairs.
cbms floats list Conduction band minimum per static calculation computed structures.
vbms floats list Valence band maximum per static calculation computed structures.
stresses floats lists list Stress tensor per static calculation computed structures.
charges floats dicts lists list Charges projected onto spd orbitals per atom per static calculation computed structures.
magnetization floats lists list Magnetization in Bohr magnetons per atom per static calculation computed structures.
total_magnetization floats list Total magnetization in Bohr magnetons per static calculation computed structures.
forces floats lists list Cartesian forces per atom per static calculation computed structures.
bandgaps floats list list of band gaps in eV for static calculation computed structures.

Table 4.

Key, value data type, and value description for distortion.json entries.

Key Type Description
_id bson.objectid.ObjectId These ids are used to generate cid in workflow_data JSON file.
pretty_formula unicode Composition with elements sorted by electronegativity.
polar_id unicode Materials Project Id.
nonpolar_id unicode Materials Project Id.
polar_icsd float ICSD id number, if available.
nonpolar_icsd float ICSD id number, if available.
polar_spacegroup float Polar space group, integer between 1 and 230.
nonpolar_spacegroup float Nonpolar space group, integer between 1 and 230.
bilbao_polar_spacegroup float Polar space group from Bilbao Crystallographic Server, integer between 1 and 230.
bilbao_nonpolar_spacegroup float Nonpolar space group from Bilbao Crystallographic Server, integer between 1 and 230.
distortion dict Details pertaining to distortion between nonpolar and polar structure.
polar_band_gap float Materials Project computed band gap.
nonpolar_band_gap float Materials Project computed band gap.

Table 5.

JSON keys, value data type, and value description for distortion dictionary of distortion.json entries.

Key Type Description
high_symm dict of pymatgen.Structure Nonpolar structure in high-symmetry setting.
high_low_setting dict of pymatgen.Structure Nonpolar structure in low-symmetry setting.
low_symm dict of pymatgen.Structure Polar structure in low-symmetry setting.
high_pre unicode Structure information as directly output by Bilbao Crystallographic Server website.
high_low_pre unicode Structure information as directly output by Bilbao Crystallographic Server website.
low_pre unicode Structure information as directly output by Bilbao Crystallographic Server website.
distortion list Table of low-symmetry setting of Wyckoff position, the string “(x, y, z)”, species, distortion in x, y, and z, and the magnitude of distortion.
pairings list Wyckoff splitting pairing between high symmetry and low symmetry structures.
dmax unicode Maximum distortion distance between nonpolar and polar structure.
s unicode Degree of lattice distortion (S) is the spontaneous strain (sum of the squared eigenvalues of the strain tensor divided by 3).
dav unicode Maximum distortion distance between nonpolar and polar structure.
delta unicode The measure of compatibility (Δ) (Bergerhoff et al. 1998).

Reported properties

For each candidate we provide an initial nonpolar-polar pair of structures, including the nonpolar structure in both the nonpolar, high-symmetry setting and polar, low-symmetry setting. We also provide the displacements of each atom and other metrics provided by BCS Structure Relations.

For each successful calculation, we provide the structure used for calculation, the ionic and electronic polarization computed by VASP, the ionic polarization computed via the method of point charges, the total energy and energy per atom of the structure, and other commonly computed quantities such as total magnetization, magnetization per atom, forces, and stresses. We also give details as to which calculations (out of the 22 computed) for a given candidate pair were completed.

For each set of completed calculations we also provide, the recovered spontaneous polarization using the workflow described in the Methods section, as well as spline data characterizing the smoothness of the polarization and energy trends across the nonpolar-polar distortion.

Graphical representation of results

In the top row of Fig. 6, we partition the high-quality candidates found in the Materials Project into known and newly-proposed ferroelectrics and further partition those ferroelectrics into subclasses. In Fig. 6 we see that known and new ferroelectric candidates are well mixed along the metrics of nonpolar-polar structure energy difference, distortion maximum between nonpolar and polar structures, PBE band gap of polar structure, and energy above hull (a measure of the thermodynamic driving force for decomposition79).

Fig. 6.

Fig. 6

Validated ferroelectric candidates from our automated search in the Materials Project. Computed spontaneous polarization plotted against nonpolar-polar energy difference, maximum atomic distortion, PBE + U band gap, and energy above hull of the polar structure. All results are generated for spin-polarized DFT-PBE + U calculations. Note, that for spin-polarized systems, we only initialized the calculations with a ferromagnetic ordering. The energy above hull is extracted from the Materials Project. The legend labels different subcategories considered in this work and described in the text.

In the middle row of Fig. 6, the candidates with large polarizations denoted with red triangles belong to the perovskite family. We recover many known perovskite ferroelectrics, such as: LiNbO3, AlBiO3, BiInO3, KNbO3, BaO3Ti, CdO3Ti and O3PbTi. In addition, we recover well-known double perovskite ferroelectrics, such as Bi2Nb2O9Pb and Bi2O9SrTa2. We also recover well-known antiferroelectrics possessing ferroelectric metastable phases, such as NaNbO3, HfO3Pb and O3PbZr. We again note that we do not use conventional notation for these systems but rather use alphabetical order of elements to provide a consistent ordering with our workflow output.

Other classes in the middle row of Fig. 6 are the organic (NH4)2SO4 family in blue and structures already proposed by theory to be ferroelectric in purple. These data show that there are many known and proposed ferroelectrics in the literature with polarizations of 10 μC/cm2 or less.

In the bottom row of Fig. 6, we categorize new ferroelectric candidates into different trending compositions or structure types. There are several candidates containing fluorides, carbon-oxygen compounds, and hydroxyl groups. We highlight these candidates because they are very different in composition from oxide ferroelectrics most common in the literature. We also point out some hypothetical non-magnetic hexagonal manganite-like structures found in the Materials Project database that have polarizations of approximately 10 μC/cm2 and half-quantum nonpolar polarizations.

In Fig. 7, we show trends in the number of pairs with continuous deformation with given nonpolar-polar point group transitions. There are 32 crystallographic point groups; nonpolar and polar point groups are shown in blue and red, respectively. The thickness and color of the line connecting nonpolar and polar point groups indicate the number of structures in the dataset with a continuous deformation between those point groups. We find that point group transitions that correspond to orthorhombic structures such as mmmmm2, monoclinic structures such as 2/m2 or 2/mm, and hexagonal 6/mmm6mm are the most prevalent.

Fig. 7.

Fig. 7

Schematic of the number of point group transitions between the 32 crystallographic point groups. The thickness and color of the line connecting nonpolar and polar point groups indicates the number of structures in the dataset with a continuous deformation between those point groups. The legend includes a schematic for nonpolar-polar phase transitions and describes the significance of line weights and colors connecting nonpolar and polar point groups.

In Fig. 8, we show the computed polarization of the ferroelectric candidates plotted with respect to their polar point group, similar to the plot of piezoelectric tensor magnitudes in ref. 4. The majority of candidates have polarization less than 5 μC/cm2, shown on the right. The candidates in point group 4mm with large polarizations are perovskites with a reference structure in point group m3¯m. The degree of shading of a radial cell is proportional to the number of candidates in that region of the plot. For example, there are many candidates with polar point groups 2 and mm2 that have polarizations within 25 μC/cm2.

Fig. 8.

Fig. 8

Diagrams of polarization magnitude vs. point group. The left diagram shows the full range of polarizations from 0 to 140 μC/cm2 and the right diagram zooms in on polarizations in the range 0 to 25 μC/cm2. Point groups are grouped according to symmetry. The darkness of a radial cell is proportional to the number of candidates in that region of the plot.

Technical Validation

Verification of computational methodology

Several checks are needed to ensure our automated calculations have completed satisfactorily and the information automatically extracted from them is reliable. We describe these tests below.

Testing smoothness of energy and polarization trends with distortion

We flag any ferroelectric candidates whose calculations cannot be used to reliably assess the quality of the candidate. For example, if the trend in total energy is not continuous, we cannot be confident that we can extract a meaningful polarization trend. Similarly, if the same branch polarization is not continuous, we cannot be confident that an accurate spontaneous polarization has been determined.

To assess the smoothness of trends in polarization and energy across a distortion, we use UnivariateSplines from scipy.interpolate80. We use cubic splines for fitting polarizations and quartic splines for fitting total energies. We use the default smoothness parameter of 1.0. These splines are generated using the Polarization class in pymatgen.analysis.ferroelectricity.polarization.

We find that 31 out of the 55 materials that do not have smooth interpolations contain atoms with nonzero magnetic moments, mostly containing 3d elements (V, Cr, Mn, Fe, Co, Ni) and one containing the 5d element W. We found 26 materials to have several discontinuities in total energy (even when these calculations resulted in smooth polarizations). These materials were transition metal oxides, fluorides, carbonates, orthosilicates, and phosphates with alkali or alkaline earth metals (Li, Na, and Ba for these specific examples), many being Li-ion battery cathode candidates. The transition metals in these materials (V, Cr, Mn, Fe, Co, Ni) can take multiple oxidation states. Because these discontinuities in energy were coincident with discontinuities in the total magnetization, we believe these jumps were caused by the transition metal species changing oxidation state through the distortion, suggesting the need to asses their ground state magnetic ordering more carefully.

Metallic endpoints and metallic interpolations

Polarization calculations require a nonzero band gap along the distortion path. Therefore, workflows that have either polar or nonpolar structures that are calculated to be metallic are halted. In the workflow_data.json, these workflows are designated by a workflow_status of “DEFUSED”. Of the 413 pairs considered, 80 possess metallic endpoints and therefore interpolations were not performed. Occasionally, interpolated structures between two nonmetallic structure endpoints are metallic and there were 59 that had metallic interpolation structures. If any structure along the path from nonpolar to polar structure is metallic, the quality of automated analysis cannot be guaranteed. We include these candidates in our dataset, but they are noted as having a polarization_len (see Tables 2 and 3) of less than 10 or do not have a polarization_change_norm (in cases where some of the interpolated polarizations are None). If a candidate has a polarization_len equal to 10 and have a polarization_change_norm, all interpolated polarization calculations completed successfully.

We also note that the method used to determine whether a material is insulating differs for pymatgen and VASP. In our workflow, pymatgen determines the band gap by comparing the energies of the band edges. When VASP determines whether to proceed with calculating the polarization, it checks whether the material is insulating by checking the occupations of the band edges. Since the occupations can be sensitive to the choice of smearing and k-grid density, there are instances where using our default settings in the workflow leads to partial occupancies, while the band edge energies suggest the material has a finite gap; therefore VASP will not proceed with calculating the polarization whereas our workflow deems the material to be insulating. This tends to occur for materials containing 3d elements which, as discussed earlier in the context of magnetism, would require more careful calculations to reliably capture their properties, and therefore not necessarily expected to successfully complete the workflow.

Comparison of materials project to relaxed structures

Two structural relaxation calculations are already performed on all structures in the Materials Project. We perform additional relaxations of the unit cell and atomic positions to ensure total energy convergence. We found only less than 5% (10%) of our relaxed structures have lattice parameter differences of more than 3% (1%) from the original Materials Project structures. Because we perform relaxations of nonpolar structures transformed to the low-symmetry polar setting, we compare the relaxed nonpolar structure to the low-symmetry transformed structure output by BCS of the nonpolar structure from Materials Project.

Identifying high-quality candidates

In any high-throughput search, there are calculations that complete without errors and some that require further scrutiny to interpret its results. We deem as high-quality candidates those calculations where the polarization and total energy trends are smooth and continuous; we define this criteria in the following way: the maximum difference between the data and spline fitted to the same branch polarization must be less than 10−1 μC/cm2, and the maximum difference between the data and the spline fitted to the energy trend must be less than 10−2 eV.

As shown in Table 1, out of the 255 candidates, 200 pass through our stringent verification criteria and ensures the polarization and energy trends across the ferroelectric distortion are smooth and continuous. The remaining candidates are still valid candidates; we recommend checking the polarization and energy trends by hand as the algorithms used for analysis may not have reliably recovered the spontaneous polarization in these cases, as in Fig. 5. These high-quality candidates are further described in the section Determining Known and New Ferroelectrics. There are candidates included in this list with polarization values of zero, as computed within the accuracy of our calculations; we include these since they pass the above criteria and could be tuned to host nonzero polarizations such as by chemical substitution. As well, the polarization values may be very small but this is also true of some of the known ferroelectric candidates computed with our workflow, and so for the sake of completeness we also list these candidates. We also call the reader’s attention to the materials with magnetic elements. Since all materials are initialized with ferromagnetic ordering, we do not expect to reliably capture materials with other magnetic orderings (e.g. antiferromagnets); as such, materials with nonzero magnetic moments may not necessarily have been calculated using their true magnetic ground state and those results should be interpreted with caution.

Comparison to DFT calculated polarizations from literature

We verify that our workflow reproduces the first-principles calculated polarizations for a variety of ferroelectrics in the literature. DFT calculated values for the ferroelectric polarization depends heavily on the structures and functional used in the calculation, and for magnetic systems, it will also be sensitive to magnetic ordering. For example, while in our work the endpoint structures are fully relaxed, other works constrain the relaxed polar unit cell to have the same volume as the experimental structure81; these calculated polarizations will be systematically smaller than ours due to PBE optimized structures having larger lattice parameters than experimental values.

We compare to literature where a fully optimized (unit cell, volume, and atomic positions) relaxation procedure is used. For clarity of comparison, we use the chemical formula used by these references rather than the alphabetical_formula that is convention for the rest of this work.

The ferroelectric first-principles literature is largely dominated by studies of perovskites. We compare to calculations for the perovskites BaTiO3, PbTiO3, LiNbO3, BiAlO3, CdTiO3, BiFeO3, and we include in our comparison the double perovskite SrBi2Ta2O9. These comparisons are summarized in Table 6.

Table 6.

Comparison of this work to other first-principles studies of ferroelectrics, primarily perovskites.

Formula and Space Group a (Å) b (Å) c (Å) Ps (μC/cm2)
BaTiO3 (99) ref. 87 4.005 4.210 43.5
ref. 88 4.000 4.216 47.0
This work (1) 4.000 4.224 46.7
This work (2) 4.001 4.215 45.9
PbTiO3 (99) ref. 88 3.844 4.767 125.5
This work (3) 3.871 4.594 116.8
LiNbO3 (161) ref. 88 5.203 14.110 84.7
This work (4) 5.216 14.116 84.5
SrBi2Ta2O9 (36) ref. 89 5.550 5.550 25.100 34.1
This work (5) 5.602 5.614 25.520 36.9
CdTiO3 (26) ref. 90 5.250 5.387 7.570 21.0
This work (6) 5.402 5.525 7.694 37.2
CdTiO3 (33) ref. 90 5.239 5.378 7.619 29.0
This work (7) 5.360 5.494 7.812 34.8
BiAlO3 (161) ref. 91 3.840 (cubic) 75.6
This work (8) 3.844 (cubic) 80.3
KH2PO4 (43) ref. 88 10.800 10.710 7.110 5.5
This work (9) 10.730 10.652 7.105 5.2

For this table, we use the chemical formula conventions used in the works we compare to. We compare to calculations using PBE + U unless otherwise specified. The polar space group is given in parentheses under the chemical formula. The symbol Indicates the reference being compared to used the Local Density Approximation (LDA) functional in their calculations. LDA polarization values tend to be smaller than polarization values calculated with PBE (which we use in this work) due to smaller predicted lattice parameters by LDA than PBE. The search ids for entries in the table are: (1) 69 (2) 70 (3) 389 (4) 331 (5) 80 (6) 146 (7) 147 (8) 23 (9) 257.

We note again here that because our workflow assumes ferromagnetic ordering, it will fail for many multiferroics since they tend to have other magnetic orderings, such as antiferromagnetic or noncollinear orderings. For example, two important multiferroics are BiFeO3 and YMnO3; the former is only captured to some extent by our workflow and the latter is not reported at all by our database. The standard polar phase of BiFeO3 features G-type antiferromagnetic ordering, and that for YMnO3 features A-type antiferromagnetic ordering. As the present version of our workflow initializes all calculations with ferromagnetic ground states for all magnetic systems, we do not expect to capture most multiferroics using the workflow as implemented for this search with the Materials Project database. Additionally, we note that the standard nonpolar reference structure for BiFeO3 is in space group 167 (R3¯c); however, the R3¯c structure of BiFeO3 is not in the Materials Project database. That the R3m and Pm3¯m structures of BiFeO3 calculated in this workflow, with ferromagnetic ordering and the default U value, are found to be insulating is fortuitous and allows it to be reported as a high quality candidate. However, the BiFeO3 experimentally verified ground state structure, 161 (R3c), did not complete our workflow due to metallic interpolations. Conversely, YMnO3 is DEFUSED and does not proceed to the interpolations because its nonpolar structure is found to be metallic in our calculations. Extending the workflows to account for antiferromagnetic and other spin-ordered ground states, as well as to relax the constraint that a nonpolar reference structure exist in the database, will enable casting a wider net for known and new multiferroics, and will be the subject of future work.

Determining known and new ferroelectrics

We distinguish known from new ferroelectrics in our workflow depending on whether or not a material has been reported in the literature as ferroelectric. Thus, we perform a literature review by hand for every considered candidate, and leave automating such literature searches to future work. We find that out of 200 high quality candidates, 74 are known or previously proposed ferroelectrics and 126 are, to our knowledge, new ferroelectric candidates.

In Fig. 6, we plot calculated spontaneous polarization versus nonpolar-polar total energy difference, maximum distortion distance, PBE band gap, and energy difference between the polar structure and convex hull reported in the Materials Project for known, proposed and new ferroelectric candidates. We also provide tables of the known and new candidates grouped by chemical formula and polar space group in Online-only Tables 1 and 2, respectively. Details connecting these candidate to specific workflow calculations are in Online-only Table 3.

Online-only Table 1.

Known and proposed high quality ferroelectric candidates and their space groups, polarizations and band gaps.

Formula Polar Space Group Nonpolar Space Group Polarization (μ C/cm^2) Band Gap (eV) Search ID Subcategory
Ag3IS 4 155 0.7 0.3 11 Proposed by theory114
221 0.7 0.3 12
146 155 11.7 0.5 13
Al2BaO4 173 182 0.3 4.1 18 Proposed by theory115
173 182 0.3 4.1 19
Al2CaH4O10Si2 33 63 4.2 5.1 20
Al3F19Pb5 108 140 13.9 5.2 21
AlBiO3 161 221 80.3 3.1 23 Perovskite
185 194 4.8 0.8 24
AlF7MgNa2 46 74 1.1 6.7 30
B2K3Nb3O12 26 189 0.1 2.4 46
B3CaH5O8 4 14 0.6 5.6 48
B7ClMg3O13 29 219 0.3 5.7 51 Boracite
BaNiO3 186 194 3.7 1.5 66
BaO3Ti 38 221 49.9 2.4 68 Perovskite
99 221 46.7 1.8 69
45.9 1.8 70
160 221 49.9 2.5 71
BaO5Ti2 5 12 15.3 2.2 72
BeF4H8N2 33 62 0.6 6.6 75 (NH4)2SO4 family
0.6 6.6 76
Bi2Nb2O9Pb 36 139 38.1 2.3 79 Perovskite
Bi2O9SrTa2 36 139 36.9 2.5 80 Perovskite
41 139 38.3 2.3 81
Bi4O12Ti3 7 139 58.1 2.4 82
41 139 17 2.4 83
11.5 1.6 84
BiCl8F4H3K6 186 194 0.1 4.2 85
BiFeO3 160 221 124.5 1.8 89 Perovskite
BiInO3 33 62 64.7 2.8 91 Perovskite
221 64.7 2.8 92
BiO3Sc 9 15 5.7 2.7 94 Hexagonal manganite-like
9 221 5.7 2.7 95
Br4K2Zn 4 11 1.9 3.7 100 (NH4)2SO4 family
C3ClH10NO4 4 11 0.3 5.6 108 Proposed by theory116
CdO3Ti 26 62 37.2 2.5 146 Perovskite
33 62 34.8 2.4 147
Cl3CsPb 38 221 2.3 2.6 158 Perovskite
Cl4K2Zn 33 62 2.2 4.4 164 (NH4)2SO4 family
0.5 4.5 165
Cl4Rb2Zn 33 62 0.5 4.5 166 (NH4)2SO4 family
0.3 4.4 167
ClH 44 139 57.4 5.2 171
CsF3Pb 161 221 0.7 3.4 195 Perovskite; Proposed by Theory117
CsO4PZn 33 62 1 4 196
F4MgSr 4 11 10.7 6.7 220 Proposed by theory118
H2KO4P 9 14 0.5 5.2 256
43 122 5.2 5.4 257
H2O 4 19 13.5 5.5 264
13.5 5.5 265
H2O4PRb 43 122 5.4 5.2 271 Hydroxyl
H8N2O4S 33 62 0 5.1 292 (NH4)2SO4 family
HfO2 29 225 53.4 4.4 301
HfO3Pb 32 55 19.8 2.8 302 Perovskite
HfO3Sr 99 221 15.1 3.8 303 Perovskite
K2O4Se 33 62 0.7 3.7 309 (NH4)2SO4 family
KNbO3 38 221 51.3 2.1 313 Perovskite
99 221 48.7 1.6 314
160 221 50.7 2.3 315
LiNbO3 161 167 84.5 3.4 331 Perovskite
MgO3Si 33 60 1.1 4.7 346 Perovskite
N6Pb 33 62 0.4 2.3 358
NaNbO3 26 127 53.9 2.4 360 Perovskite
29 57 31.5 2.4 361
63 31.5 2.4 362
NbO4Sb 33 52 18.1 2.4 365
O2Zr 29 225 51.2 3.7 388
O3PbTi 99 221 116.8 2 389 Perovskite
O3PbZr 32 55 23.5 2.8 390 Perovskite
O3W 185 191 21 1.5 399
21 1.5 400
193 21 1.5 401
O5PTiTl 33 52 22.1 2.7 404
O7Sr2Ta2 36 63 3 2.9 407 Perovskite
124.5

Known candidates are in light gray. All candidates are non-magnetic unless indicated with a † which indicates the candidates are calculated to be ferromagnetic. Only three of all high-quality (know, proposed, and new) candidates contain atoms with nonzero magnetic moments: BiFeO3 (Search ID 89), CrP3O9 (Search ID 191), LiO4PV (Search ID 342). Please see text for discussion of workflow performance on magnetic properties. The search ID being a simplified unique identifier, defined for the purposes of our work, for pairs of structures used in our workflow search. Spaces in table implies the same space group number as the previous row.

Online-only Table 2.

New high quality ferroelectric candidates and their space groups, polarizations and band gaps.

Formula Polar Space Group Nonpolar Space Group Polarization (μ C/cm^2) Band Gap (eV) Search ID Subcategory
Ag10Br3Te4 36 63 3.9 0.9 1
Ag2O4W 34 58 1 1.8 4
Ag2S 4 11 21.1 0.4 5
64 17.6 0.4 7
36 63 0.4 1.4 9
AgAl11O17 40 63 2.4 3.1 15
AgC2O2 5 15 0 1 17
AlCH2NaO5 46 74 0.8 5 25
AlCl4Hg2Sb 33 60 0.5 0.9 26
AlH3O3 1 2 0.1 5 32 Hydroxyl
7 61 8.1 5 33
AlN 186 194 133 4.1 38
AuCl4K 7 14 0.3 1.4 43
B13C2Li 44 74 0.8 2.6 45
B2O6Zn3 9 15 0.1 2.7 47
Ba2F7Y 4 14 0.7 6.5 57
BaC2CaO6 4 11 0 4.8 59
BaCO3 4 11 1 4.5 60 Carbon-oxygen compound
BaCl5La 4 62 26.1 4 61
BiCuO8W2 1 2 0.8 1.3 86
BiO3Y 185 194 9.7 2.1 96 Hexagonal manganite-like
Br3CsGe 8 221 19.3 1.7 97
C2HO2 6 11 3.4 2.8 106 Carbon-oxygen compound
C2HgN2S2 5 12 0.9 2.1 107
C6Cu2H10N4S3 4 14 0 2.8 109
CCs4O4 146 215 1.7 1.6 110 Carbon-oxygen compound
CH4N2S 26 62 4.8 3.3 111
CHO2Tl 33 52 0.8 3.5 112 Carbon-oxygen compound
CK4O4 5 121 16.7 2 113 Carbon-oxygen compound
16.6 2 114
8 121 10.2 2.2 115
146 215 2.6 2.3 116
160 215 14.6 1.9 117
CLi4O4 5 121 49 5 118 Carbon-oxygen compound
49 5 119
0.1 4.8 120
160 215 16.6 4.2 121
CN2Pb 33 62 10.5 1.9 122
CNa4O4 5 121 39.2 2.2 123 Carbon-oxygen compound
39.2 2.2 124
8 215 12.6 1.7 125
146 215 3.6 1.9 126
56.2 2.2 127
CO4Rb4 5 23 14.6 1.4 128 Carbon-oxygen compound
121 14.6 1.4 129
14.6 1.4 130
146 215 0.6 1.7 131
160 215 42.8 0.4 132
Ca5ClO12P3 173 176 2.1 5.4 138
CaF2 26 123 16.5 6.3 139 Fluoride
Cd2ClP3 9 15 0.8 1.3 144
CdCl2 5 12 48.4 3.1 145
Cl4GaHg2Sb 33 60 0.5 0.8 162
ClH3O5 33 62 5.2 5.4 172
ClH4NO4 33 62 2.2 5.3 173
ClIn 36 63 3.8 1.4 174
CrO3 33 62 0.4 1.6 188
CrO9P3 9 15 0.3 3.2 191
Cs2HgI4 4 11 0.3 2.1 192
Cs2N2Tb6Te7 8 12 0.2 0.8 193
Cs2O3Pb 36 63 7.2 1.4 194
CuI 7 216 0 1.2 204
Er2F7K 33 62 1.5 6.9 210 Fluoride
F2HRb 46 140 1.6 6.7 212 Fluoride
F2Pb 41 225 5 4.4 213 Fluoride
F3Nd 185 193 17.6 7.7 214 Fluoride
F3PbRb 9 221 4 3.8 215 Perovskite
F5V 9 15 1 2.8 223 Fluoride
29.7 3.3 224
F6LiV 33 225 1.3 3.2 225 Fluoride
FTl 39 225 6.4 3.1 229 Fluoride
GaLuO3 185 194 8 2.9 249 Hexagonal manganite-like
GaN5O14 5 82 0 1.3 252
GaO3Sc 185 194 10 3.2 253 Hexagonal manganite-like
H2Mg 29 60 30.9 2.4 258
H2MoO4 1 2 0.2 3.2 260
39.2 2.5 261
16.3 2.1 262
H2O10U3 1 2 23 1.8 266
23 1.8 267
H2O2Sr 26 62 1.2 4 268 Hydroxyl
1.2 4 269
H2O4S 5 15 20.4 6.1 272 Hydroxyl
9 15 51 5.8 273
H2O4Sn3 9 114 1.6 2.5 275 Hydroxyl
H2O4U 36 64 2.9 1.9 277 Hydroxyl
2.9 1.9 278
H3LaO3 173 176 17.9 4 279 Hydroxyl
H3O3Pr 6 11 0.1 3.8 280 Hydroxyl
176 0.1 3.8 281
H3O3Y 173 176 7.7 3.9 282 Hydroxyl
H3O4P 7 14 4.1 5.7 283
4.1 5.7 284
H4O5S 7 14 1 5.7 286
H5IO6 7 14 0.3 2.3 289
HInO2 31 58 13.2 1.8 293 Hydroxyl
HK2NO6S2 9 15 3.2 5.3 294
HNaO 4 11 10.7 3 295 Hydroxyl
63 10.7 3 296
HORb 4 11 10.5 3.4 300 Hydroxyl
ILi6PS5 9 216 2.6 2.3 304
K2O7Zn6 102 136 2.5 0.8 310
K3S4Sb 36 217 1 2.2 311
KLaS4Si 4 11 7.4 2.8 312
LiO12P3Zr2 5 167 8 4.2 341
LiO4PV 33 60 0.1 2.7 342
MgN2O6 29 205 0.7 3.5 345
MoO3 7 62 4.7 1.9 353
N2O6Zn 29 205 1.1 3.3 356
N3Na 5 12 51.8 4.1 357
NbO5P 33 62 4 2.3 366
O23Rb6Si10 38 189 0.1 4.3 370
0.5 4.2 371
O2Si 4 20 0 5.4 373
182 0 5.4 374
0.4 5.6 375
8 12 0 5.5 378
9 194 0.1 5.5 379
36 63 0.2 5.7 383
0 5.6 384
64 0.2 5.4 385
44 119 0 5.7 386
O3SbY 185 194 7.5 1.5 391 Hexagonal manganite-like
O3ScY 185 194 6.6 3.1 392 Hexagonal manganite-like
O3Te 185 194 0 0.5 394
OPb 29 57 54.3 2.2 409

All candidates are non-magnetic unless indicated with a † which indicates the candidates are calculated to be ferromagnetic. Only three of candidates contain atoms with nonzero magnetic moments: BiFeO3 (Search ID 89), CrP3O9 (Search ID 191), LiO4PV (Search ID 342). Please see text for discussion of workflow performance on magnetic properties. The search ID being a simplified unique identifier, defined for the purposes of our work, for pairs of structures used in our workflow search. Spaces in table implies the same space group number as the previous row.

As seen in Fig. 6, known and newly-proposed ferroelectrics display similar dispersion and overlap in the range considered. The middle row of Fig. 6 demonstrates the variety of known ferroelectric candidates that we are able to recover, from perovskites to candidates in the organic (NH4)2 SO4 family to candidates proposed by theory. The bottom row of Fig. 6 shows categories of new ferroelectric candidates we find in the Materials Project, some from previously known ferroelectric classes such as hexagonal manganite-like structures and less-studied categories such as fluorides, carbon-oxygen compounds, and crystals containing hydroxyl groups.

Comparison to hand-curated list of ferroelectrics in the Pauling Files database

The Pauling File is a materials database accessible through SpringerMaterials18. In this database, there are materials tagged as ferroelectric and antiferroelectric. We use these tagged entries to validate whether the workflow is able to successfully identify diverse ferroelectrics by examining which tagged (anti)ferroelectrics complete the workflow. In the Pauling Files, there are 955 distinct compositions tagged as (anti)ferroelectric, 306 of which are pure (not doped) compositions. Out of 306 pure compositions, 95 of those compositions are included in the Materials Project as polar materials. This does not necessarily mean that the Materials Project database contains the same ferroelectric polar structure as referenced in the Pauling Files; rather, it simply means that there exists a polar structure in the Materials Project with the same composition as a tagged ferroelectric or antiferroelectric in the Pauling Files. 57 of these compositions have nonpolar-polar structure pairs in the Materials Project, 40 of which are found to have a continuously distortion by BCS Structure Relations. 32 of the 40 are successfully identified by the workflow as high-quality candidates, meaning the energy and polarization trends are smooth. Out of the 8 candidates that did not successfully make it through the workflow as high quality candidates, 4 of them (CrO3Y, Eu2GeSe4, Cl3CoTl, and MnO3Y) had metallic endpoints, 2 candidates (Cl3CrRb and Br3MnRb) had metallic interpolation structures, and 2 candidates (Cl4CoRb2 and B7ClCr3O13) did not have smooth energy trends due to fluctuating band gaps and magnetic moments in the interpolations. We note that most of these 8 candidates are non-d0 systems, and therefore expected to exhibit magnetic order. This suggests that the primary impact to the robustness of our workflow is the level of DFT used and the magnetic orderings considered; since PBE tends to underestimate band gaps, and since ferromagnetically-ordered systems tend to be overwhelmingly metallic, several of these candidates are experimentally insulating but are metallic in our workflow.

Comparison to experimental measurements in Landolt-Börnstein series

To validate that our workflow calculates polarizations that can be used to guide experimental efforts, we compare to tabulated experimentally measured polarizations of known ferroelectrics in Landolt-Börnstein - Group III Condensed Matter - Ferroelectrics and Related Substances1923. This series classifies hundreds of ferroelectrics into a 72 class numbering scheme. We note that polarization values for ferroelectrics in the Landolt-Börnstein series volumes 36A, 36B and 36C may be superseded by more recent experimental measurements. Experimentally measured polarizations depend greatly on the quality of the sample and the method used. For many ferroelectrics, polarization measurements made across decades vary greatly depending on these factors. Any comparison between theory must be taken in this context.

Nonetheless, plots of polarizations values calculated by our workflow vs. experimental spontaneous polarizations reported in the Landolt-Börnstein series volumes 36A, 36B and 36C are shown in Fig. 9 and tabulated in Table 7. We only compare search candidates to Landolt-Börnstein entries that match in composition and polar space group. For example, NaNbO3 is LB Number 1A-1 and has a polarization of 12 μC/cm2 for the 161 space group structure. However, all the NaNbO3 found in our search are orthorhombic (space groups 26 and 29), so we do not make the comparison.

Fig. 9.

Fig. 9

Log-log plot of experimental vs. calculated polarization for ferroelectric materials in the Landolt-Börnstein series with polarization value larger than 1 μC/cm2. 6 materials with polarization value equal to or smaller than 1 μC/cm2 are not shown in plot but are included in the Table 7. Colored regions show experimental values within ±25%, ±50%, and ±75% of calculated values.

Table 7.

Table of calculated versus experimentally measured polarizations as given in the Landolt-Börnstein - Group III: Condensed Matter - Ferroelectrics and Related Substances1921.

Search ID Formula Polarization (μC/cm2) LB number Exp. Exp. Ref.
51 B7ClMg3O13 (29) 0.3 18A-1 0.08 92
68 BaO3Ti (38) 49.9 1A-10 Not available 93
69, 70 BaO3Ti (99) 46.7, 45.9 1A-10 26 93
71 BaO3Ti (160) 49.9 1A-10 Not available 93
79 Bi2Nb2O9Pb (36) 38.1 9A-10 Not available 94
81 Bi2O9SrTa2 (41) 38.3 9A-12 5.8 95
80 Bi2O9SrTa2 (36) 36.9 9A-12 5.8 95
82 Bi4O12Ti3 (7) 58.1 9A-15 50.2 96
100 Br4K2Zn (4) 1.9 39A-16 3.0 97
111 CH4N2S (26) 4.8 50A-1 3.5 98
146 CdO3Ti (26) 37.2 1A-9 Debated 99
147 CdO3Ti (33) 34.8 1A-9 Debated 99
164, 165 Cl4K2Zn (33) 2.2, 0.5 39A-9 0.13 100
166 Cl4Rb2Zn (33) 0.5 39A-10 0.16 101
292 H8N2O4S (33) 0.0 39A-1 0.6 max at −51.5 °C, reversal by 0.05 approaching −260 °C 102
302 HfO3Pb (32) 19.8 1A-16 Antiferroelectric (62). 103
309 K2O4Se (33) 0.7 39A-2 0.15 104
313 KNbO3 (38) 51.3 1A-2 Not available 105
314 KNbO3 (99) 48.7 1A-2 41.2 105
315 KNbO3 (160) 50.7 1A-2 Not available 105
331 LiNbO3 (161) 84.5 2A-1 71 106,107
365 NbO4Sb (33) 18.1 5A-2 19.7 108
389 O3PbTi (99) 116.8 1A-11 75 109,110
390 O3PbZr (32) 23.5 1A-15 16 on cooling. Antiferroelectric (55). 111
404 O5PTiTl (33) 22.1 35A-13 Not available 112
407 O7Sr2Ta2 (36) 3.0 8A-6 1.9 113

“Not available” in the Experimental Reference column (Exp. Ref.) indicates a polarization value was not provided in these references. We make comparisons only between search candidates that have a polar space group compatible with the Landolt-Börnstein reference. The search ID being a simplified unique identifier, defined for the purposes of our work, for pairs of structures used in our workflow search.

For experimental polarizations greater than 10 μC/cm2, the majority of experimental polarizations are between 25% and −50% of those that we calculate, well within an order of magnitude. The exceptions are both polar structures of Bi2O9SrTa2 (space groups 36 and 41), which are calculated to have polarizations much greater than their experimental values. Multiple entries of a given formula indicate multiple calculations for different structure pairs in our dataset for the same compound. Compounds with polarizations of less than or equal to 1 μC/cm2 are not shown on the plot given the log-log scale. For polarizations less than 5 μC/cm2, we see our calculations capture the general trends of the experimental polarizations.

We find that the PBE functional we use for our DFT calculations overestimates polarizations. This is partially due to unit cells relaxed with PBE having larger than experimental volumes and thus larger distortions.

Usage Notes

In this work, we present 413 nonpolar-polar structure pairs in the Materials Project database that are compatible with a second-order phase transition as ferroelectric candidates and perform DFT calculations of total energy, band gap, and polarization for these structures pairs.

This dataset offers the first opportunity to compare a large number of known, previously proposed, and new ferroelectrics side by side with the same methodology. We believe by setting strict criteria for ferroelectricity and casting a wide-net using high-throughput searches, we will find candidates that challenge and advance our understanding of ferroelectric phenomena. As seen in our candidates, there may be ferroelectrics waiting to be discovered that defy our expectations. This dataset will be useful for creating new tools and criteria for analyzing diverse ferroelectrics.

The infrastructure provided by the Bilbao Crystallographic Server, FireWorks, pymatgen, and atomate is crucial to being able to perform these types of searches efficiently. Thus, we also provide our code and data for these searches with the hope they will provide access for others to perform and develop similar searches.

Our code for performing structural interpolations and polarization calculations has been incorporated into the pymatgen and atomate packages. We also provide the code that we use to create the interface that we used to view our candidates in aggregate.

The workflow we have presented can be extended to any crystal structure database, experimental and hypothetical. Several modifications can be made to this workflow to extend the scope of these searches. Notably, extending our workflow to treat different magnetic orderings will enable it to treat multiferroics. Additionally, the same DFT workflow can be used to screen any experimentally measured polar structure - even one without an existing nonpolar reference - by generating nonpolar reference structures with BCS Pseudosymmetry7. Our workflow can also be adapted to perform species substitutions and find symmetry relations between structure types, classes of structures that share space groups, Wyckoff positions, and other lattice similarities.

Acknowledgements

This work supported by the Materials Project funded by the U.S. Department of Energy, Office of Science, Office of Basic Energy Sciences, Materials Sciences and Engineering Division under Contract No. DE-AC02-05-CH11231: Materials Project program KC23MP. This research used resources of the National Energy Research Scientific Computing Center, a DOE Office of Science User Facility supported by the Office of Science of the U.S. Department of Energy under Contract No. DE-AC02-05CH11231. Additional calculations were performed on the High Performance Computing clusters at Lawrence Berkeley Lab. Work at the Molecular Foundry was supported by the Office of Science, Office of Basic Energy Sciences, of the U.S. Department of Energy, and Laboratory Directed Research and Development Program at the Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory under Contract No. DE-AC02-05CH11231. T.E.S. acknowledges support from the National Science Foundation Graduate Research Fellowship under Grant No. DGE 1106400. S.E.R. acknowledges partial support from FONDECYT Iniciación en Investigación under grant No. 11180590. A.J. was funded by the U.S. Department of Energy, Office of Basic Energy Sciences, Early Career Research Program.

Online-only Tables

Author contributions

All authors contributed to the outline of the workflow. T.E.S. developed the code for the workflow including executing polarization calculations, post-processing calculations to recover the same branch polarization and assess the quality of candidates, and visualizing the results through the graphic web interface. T.E.S. and S.A.M. performed the density functional theory calculations and validated the dataset through comparison to the Pauling Files and Landolt-Börstein series. T.E.S. and S.E.R. performed the literature search to identify known ferroelectrics in the dataset. S.E.R. and A.J. contributed to verification of the workflow. S.E.R., A.J. and J.B.N. were involved in supervising and planning the work. All authors contributed to the writing of the manuscript.

Code availability

VASP version 5.3.5 used to perform DFT calculations is a proprietary code. The Bilbao Crystallographic Server (BCS) is freely available on-line at http://www.cryst.ehu.es. Fireworks, atomate, and pymatgen are python packages accessible on GitHub. Fireworks and atomate are released under a modified Berkeley Software Distribution (BSD) License. pymatgen is released under a Massachusetts Institute of Technology (MIT) License. Both MIT and BSD licenses are open-source and permit both commercial and non-commercial use. Our workflow code is included since atomate version 0.6.7 and our analysis code is available in pymatgen since v2019.2.4. We also use the following python packages in our analysis and Graphical Representation of Results: numpy, scipy, matplotlib, ipython, and jupyter80,8286. These packages are freely available through the Python Package Index (https://pypi.org/).

Our code for recovering the same branch polarization from polarization calculations has been contributed to pymatgen under the pymatgen.analysis.ferroelectricity module. Our code for the DFT and polarization analysis workflows for performing polarization calculations has been contributed to atomate under the atomate.vasp.workflows.base.ferroelectric module. We also provide code for the interface that we used to view our candidates in aggregate. The web interface for the current work is hosted at http://blondegeek.github.io/ferroelectric_search_site/. The code for the interface can be found at http://github.com/blondegeek/ferroelectric_search_site.

Competing interests

The authors declare no competing interests.

Footnotes

Publisher’s note Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

References

  • 1.Jain, A., Shin, Y. & Persson, K. A. Computational predictions of energy materials using density functional theory. Nature Reviews Materials1, 15004 (2016).
  • 2.Yan Q, et al. Solar fuels photoanode materials discovery by integrating high-throughput theory and experiment. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences. 2017;114:3040–3043. doi: 10.1073/pnas.1619940114. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 3.Chen R, Po HC, Neaton JB, Vishwanath A. Topological materials discovery using electron filling constraints. Nature Physics. 2017;14:55–61. doi: 10.1038/nphys4277. [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  • 4.de Jong M, Chen W, Geerlings H, Asta M, Persson KA. A database to enable discovery and design of piezoelectric materials. Scientific Data. 2015;2:150053. doi: 10.1038/sdata.2015.53. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 5.Abrahams SC. Structurally Based Prediction of Ferroelectricity in Inorganic Materials with Point Group 6mm. Acta Crystallographica Section B. 1988;B44:585–595. doi: 10.1107/S0108768188010110. [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  • 6.Abrahams SC. Structurally based predictions of ferroelectricity in seven inorganic materials with space group Pba2 and two experimental confirmations. Acta Crystallographica Section B. 1989;45:228–232. doi: 10.1107/S0108768189001072. [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  • 7.Capillas C, et al. A new computer tool at the Bilbao Crystallographic Server to detect and characterize pseudosymmetry. Zeitschrift für Kristallographie. 2011;226:186–196. doi: 10.1524/zkri.2011.1321. [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  • 8.Igartua JM, Aroyo MI, Kroumova E, Perez-Mato JM. Search for Pnma materials with high-temperature structural phase transitions. Acta Crystallographica Section B Structural Science. 1999;55:177–185. doi: 10.1107/S0108768198013342. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 9.Kroumova E, Aroyo MI, Perez-Mato JM. Prediction of new displacive ferroelectrics through systematic pseudosymmetry search. Results for materials with Pba2 and Pmc21 symmetry. Acta Crystallographica Section B Structural Science. 2002;58:921–933. doi: 10.1107/S0108768102012120. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 10.Stokes HT, Sadate C, Hatch DM, Boyer LL, Mehl MJ. Analysis of the ferroelectric phase transition in BaAl2O4 by group theoretical methods and first-principles calculations. Physical Review B. 2002;65:064105. doi: 10.1103/PhysRevB.65.064105. [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  • 11.Perez-Mato JM, Withers RL, Larsson AK, Orobengoa D, Liu Y. Distortion modes and related ferroic properties of the stuffed tridymite-type compounds SrAl2O4 and BaAl2O4. Physical Review B - Condensed Matter and Materials Physics. 2009;79:1–12. doi: 10.1103/PhysRevB.79.064111. [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  • 12.Smith EH, Benedek NA, Fennie CJ. Interplay of Octahedral Rotations and Lone Pair Ferroelectricity in CsPbF3. Inorganic Chemistry. 2015;54:8536–8543. doi: 10.1021/acs.inorgchem.5b01213. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 13.Bennett JW. Discovery and Design of Functional Materials: Integration of Database Searching and First Principles Calculations. Physics Procedia. 2012;34:14–23. doi: 10.1016/j.phpro.2012.05.003. [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  • 14.Bennett JW, Garrity KF, Rabe KM, Vanderbilt D. Hexagonal ABC semiconductors as ferroelectrics. Physical Review Letters. 2012;109:167602. doi: 10.1103/PhysRevLett.109.167602. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 15.Bennett JW, Rabe KM. Integration of first-principles methods and crystallographic database searches for new ferroelectrics: Strategies and explorations. J. Solid State Chem. 2012;195:21–31. doi: 10.1016/j.jssc.2012.05.013. [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  • 16.Garrity KF. High-throughput first-principles search for new ferroelectrics. Phys. Rev. B. 2018;97:024115. doi: 10.1103/PhysRevB.97.024115. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 17.Lines, M. E. & Glass, A. M. Principles and Applications of Ferroelectrics and Related Materials (Oxford University Press, 2001).
  • 18.Villars, P. (Chief Editor). PAULING FILE in: Inorganic Solid Phases, SpringerMaterials (online database), Springer, Heidelberg (ed.) (2012).
  • 19.Shiozaki, Y., Nakamura, E. & Mitsui, T. (eds.) Landolt-Börnstein - Group III Condensed Matter _Volume 36A1: “Ferroelectrics and Related Substances: Oxides Part 1: Perovskite-type Oxides and LiNbO3Family” (Springer-Verlag, 2001).
  • 20.Shiozaki, Y., Nakamura, E. & Mitsui, T. (eds.) Landolt-Börnstein - Group III Condensed Matter _Volume 36A2: “Ferroelectrics and Related Substances: Oxides Part 2: Oxides other than Perovskite-type and LiNbO3Family” (Springer-Verlag, 2002).
  • 21.Shiozaki, Y., Nakamura, E. & Mitsui, T. (eds.) Landolt-Börnstein - Group III Condensed Matter _Volume 36B1: “Ferroelectrics and Related Substances: Inorganic Substances other than Oxides Part 1: SbSI family... TAAP” (Springer-Verlag, 2004).
  • 22.Shiozaki, Y., Nakamura, E. & Mitsui, T. (eds.) Landolt-Börnstein - Group III Condensed Matter _Volume 36B2: “Ferroelectrics and Related Substances: Inorganic Substances other than Oxides Part 2: (NH4)SO4family... K3BiCl6 _2KCl_KH3F4” (Springer-Verlag, 2006).
  • 23.Shiozaki, Y., Nakamura, E. & Mitsui, T. (eds.) Landolt-Börnstein - Group III Condensed Matter _Volume 36C: “Ferroelectrics and Related Substances: Organic crystals, liquid crystals and polymers” (Springer-Verlag, 2006).
  • 24.Jain A, et al. The Materials Project: A materials genome approach to accelerating materials innovation. APL Materials. 2013;1:011002. doi: 10.1063/1.4812323. [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  • 25.Curtarolo S, et al. AFLOW: An automatic framework for high-throughput materials discovery. Computational Materials Science. 2012;58:218–226. doi: 10.1016/j.commatsci.2012.02.005. [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  • 26.Pizzi G, Cepellotti A, Sabatini R, Marzari N, Kozinsky B. AiiDA: automated interactive infrastructure and database for computational science. Computational Materials Science. 2016;111:218–230. doi: 10.1016/j.commatsci.2015.09.013. [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  • 27.Bergerhoff, G. & Brown, I. Inorganic crystal structure database (International Union of Crystallography, 1987).
  • 28.Hellenbrandt M. The inorganic crystal structure database (ICSD)|present and future. Crystallography Reviews. 2004;10:17–22. doi: 10.1080/08893110410001664882. [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  • 29.Saal JE, Kirklin S, Aykol M, Meredig B, Wolverton C. Materials design and discovery with high-throughput density functional theory: The open quantum materials database (OQMD) JOM. 2013;65:1501–1509. doi: 10.1007/s11837-013-0755-4. [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  • 30.Kirklin, S. et al. The open quantum materials database (OQMD): assessing the accuracy of DFT formation energies. npj Computational Materials1, 15010 (2015).
  • 31.Lines, M. E. & Glass, A. M. chap. Basic Concepts (Oxford University Press, Oxford, 2001).
  • 32.Rabe, K. M., Dawber, M., Lichtensteiger, C., Ahn, C. H. & Triscone, J.-M. Modern physics of ferroelectrics: Essential background. In Physics of Ferroelectrics: A Modern Perspective, 1–30 (Springer Berlin Heidelberg, 2007).
  • 33.Strukov, B. A. & Levanyuk, A. P. General characteristics of structural phase transitions in crystals. In Ferroelectric Phenomena in Crystals, 1–29 (Springer Berlin Heidelberg, 1998).
  • 34.Chandra, P. & Littlewood, P. B. A landau primer for ferroelectrics. In Physics of Ferroelectrics: A Modern Perspective, 69–116 (Springer Berlin Heidelberg, Berlin, Heidelberg, 2007).
  • 35.Stokes, H. T. & Hatch, D. M. Isotropy Subgroups of the 230 Crystallographic Space Groups (WORLD SCIENTIFIC, 1989).
  • 36.Müller, U. Symmetry relations at phase transitions. In Symmetry Relationships between Crystal Structures, 196–215 (Oxford University Press, 2013).
  • 37.Ong SP, et al. Python Materials Genomics (pymatgen): A robust, open-source python library for materials analysis. Computational Materials Science. 2013;68:314–319. doi: 10.1016/j.commatsci.2012.10.028. [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  • 38.Mathew K, et al. Atomate: A high-level interface to generate, execute, and analyze computational materials science workows. Computational Materials Science. 2017;139:140–152. doi: 10.1016/j.commatsci.2017.07.030. [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  • 39.Resta R. Theory of the electric polarization in crystals. Ferroelectrics. 1992;136:51–55. doi: 10.1080/00150199208016065. [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  • 40.Aroyo, M. I. (ed.) International Tables for Crystallography Volume A: Space-group symmetry (International Union of Crystallography, 2016).
  • 41.Müller, U. Subgroups and supergroups of point and space groups. In Symmetry Relationships between Crystal Structures, 86–99 (Oxford University Press, 2013).
  • 42.King-Smith RD, Vanderbilt D. Theory of polarization of crystalline solids. Phys. Rev. B. 1993;47:1651–1654. doi: 10.1103/PhysRevB.47.1651. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 43.Vanderbilt D, King-Smith RD. Electric polarization as a bulk quantity and its relation to surface charge. Physical Review B. 1993;48:4442–4455. doi: 10.1103/PhysRevB.48.4442. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 44.Resta R. Macroscopic polarization in crystalline dielectrics: the geometric phase approach. Reviews of Modern Physics. 1994;66:899–915. doi: 10.1103/RevModPhys.66.899. [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  • 45.Rabe KM, Waghmare UV. First-principles model hamiltonians for ferroelectric phase transitions. Ferroelectrics. 1992;136:147–156. doi: 10.1080/00150199208016074. [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  • 46.Resta, R. & Vanderbilt, D. Theory of polarization: A modern approach. In Physics of Ferroelectrics: A Modern Perspective, 31–68 (Springer Berlin Heidelberg, Berlin, Heidelberg, 2007).
  • 47.Spaldin NA. A beginner's guide to the modern theory of polarization. Journal of Solid State Chemistry. 2012;195:2–10. doi: 10.1016/j.jssc.2012.05.010. [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  • 48.Rabe, K. M. & Ghosez, P. First-principles studies of ferroelectric oxides. In Topics in Applied Physics, 117–174 (Springer Berlin Heidelberg, 2007).
  • 49.Kittel C. Theory of antiferroelectric crystals. Phys. Rev. 1951;82:729–732. doi: 10.1103/PhysRev.82.729. [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  • 50.Rabe, K. M. Antiferroelectricity in Oxides: A Reexamination. In Functional Metal Oxides, 221–244 (Wiley-VCH Verlag GmbH & Co. KGaA, 2013).
  • 51.Tolédano P, Guennou M. Theory of antiferroelectric phase transitions. Phys. Rev. B. 2016;94:014107. doi: 10.1103/PhysRevB.94.014107. [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  • 52.Reyes-Lillo, S. E. & Rabe, K. M. Antiferroelectricity and ferroelectricity in epitaxially strained PbZrO3 from first principles. Physical Review B88, 180102R (2013).
  • 53.Toyo, A. spglib, https://atztogo.github.io/spglib/ (2018).
  • 54.Togo, A. & Tanaka, I. Spglib: a software library for crystal symmetry search, arxiv:1808.01590 (2018).
  • 55.Ong SP, et al. The materials application programming interface (API): A simple, flexible and effcient API for materials data based on REpresentational state transfer (REST) principles. Computational Materials Science. 2015;97:209–215. doi: 10.1016/j.commatsci.2014.10.037. [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  • 56.Aroyo, M. I. et al. Crystallography online: Bilbao Crystallographic Server. Bulg. Chem. Commun. 43, 183–197 (2011).
  • 57.Aroyo MI, Kirov A, Capillas C, Perez-Mato JM, Wondratschek H. Bilbao crystallographic server. II. representations of crystallographic point groups and space groups. Acta Crystallographica Section A Foundations of Crystallography. 2006;62:115–128. doi: 10.1107/S0108767305040286. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 58.Aroyo, M. I. et al. Bilbao Crystallographic Server: I. Databases and crystallographic computing programs. Zeitschrift für Kristallographie - Crystalline Materials221, 15–27 (2006).
  • 59.Bilbao Crystallographic Server. Structure relations, http://www.cryst.ehu.es/cryst/rel.html (2019).
  • 60.Stokes, H. T., Hatch, D. M. & Campbell, B. J. ISOTROPY Software Suite, iso.byu.edu (2019).
  • 61.Aas, G., Lee, J., & Lester, A. Mechanize - stateful programmatic web browsing, version 0.4.4, https://pypi.python.org/pypi/mechanize/ (2019).
  • 62.Scott JF. Searching for new ferroelectrics and multiferroics: A users point of view. npj Computational Materials. 2015;1:15006. doi: 10.1038/npjcompumats.2015.6. [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  • 63.Kresse G, Furthmüller J. Effciency of ab-initio total energy calculations for metals and semiconductors using a plane-wave basis set. Computational Materials Science. 1996;6:15–50. doi: 10.1016/0927-0256(96)00008-0. [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  • 64.Kresse G, Hafner J. Ab initio molecular dynamics for liquid metals. Physical Review B. 1993;47:558–561. doi: 10.1103/PhysRevB.47.558. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 65.Kresse, G. & Furthmüller, J. Efficient iterative schemes for ab initio total-energy calculations using a plane-wave basis set. Physical Review B54, 11169 (1996). [DOI] [PubMed]
  • 66.Perdew JP, Burke K, Ernzerhof M. Generalized Gradient Approximation Made Simple. Physical review letters. 1996;77:3865–3868. doi: 10.1103/PhysRevLett.77.3865. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 67.Blöchl, P. E. Projector augmented-wave method. Physical Review B50, 17953 (1994). [DOI] [PubMed]
  • 68.Kresse G, Jourbert D. From ultrasoft pseudopotentials to the projector augmented-wave method. Physical Review B. 1999;59:1758–1775. doi: 10.1103/PhysRevB.59.1758. [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  • 69.Materials Project. Materials project calculation guide, https://materialsproject.org/docs/calculations (2019).
  • 70.King-Smith RD, Vanderbilt D. Theory of polarization of crystalline solids. Physical Review B. 1993;47:1651–1654. doi: 10.1103/PhysRevB.47.1651. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 71.Resta, R. Berry phase in electronic wavefunctions. Troisime Cycle de la Physique en Suisse Romande 899–915 (Anne Academique 1995-1996).
  • 72.Jain A, et al. Formation enthalpies by mixing GGA and GGA + U calculations. Physical Review B - Condensed Matter and Materials Physics. 2011;84:1–10. [Google Scholar]
  • 73.Jain A, et al. A high-throughput infrastructure for density functional theory calculations. Computational Materials Science. 2011;50:2295–2310. doi: 10.1016/j.commatsci.2011.02.023. [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  • 74.Dudarev SL, Savrasov SY, Humphreys CJ, Sutton AP. Electron-energy-loss spectra and the structural stability of nickel oxide: An LSDA+U study. Physical Review B. 1998;57:1505–1509. doi: 10.1103/PhysRevB.57.1505. [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  • 75.Jain A, et al. FireWorks: a dynamic workow system designed for high-throughput applications. Concurrency Computation Practice and Experience. 2015;27:5037–5059. doi: 10.1002/cpe.3505. [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  • 76.Vanderbilt D. Berry-phase theory of proper piezoelectric response. Journal of Physics and Chemistry of Solids. 2000;61:147–151. doi: 10.1016/S0022-3697(99)00273-5. [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  • 77.Smidt TE, Mack SA, Reyes-Lillo SE, Jain A, Neaton JB. 2019. Ferroelectric search distortion and workow data and VASP files. figshare. [DOI]
  • 78.Smidt TE, Mack SA, Reyes-Lillo SE, Jain A, Neaton J. 2019. B. blondegeek/ferroelectric search site: Ferroelectric Search Site. Zenodo. [DOI]
  • 79.Ong SP, Wang L, Kang B, Ceder G. Li-fe-p-o2 phase diagram from first principles calculations. Chemistry of Materials. 2008;20:1798–1807. doi: 10.1021/cm702327g. [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  • 80.Virtanen, P. et al. SciPy 1.0–Fundamental Algorithms for Scientific Computing in Python, https://arxiv.org/abs/1907.10121 (2019). [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed]
  • 81.Armiento R, Kozinsky B, Fornari M, Ceder G. Screening for high-performance piezoelectrics using high-throughput density functional theory. Phys. Rev. B. 2011;84:014103. doi: 10.1103/PhysRevB.84.014103. [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  • 82.Oliphant, T. NumPy: A guide to NumPy. USA: Trelgol Publishing, http://www.numpy.org/ (2006–).
  • 83.van der Walt S, Colbert SC, Varoquaux G. The numpy array: A structure for efficient numerical computation. Computing in Science Engineering. 2011;13:22–30. doi: 10.1109/MCSE.2011.37. [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  • 84.Hunter JD. Matplotlib: A 2d graphics environment. Computing in Science & Engineering. 2007;9:90–95. doi: 10.1109/MCSE.2007.55. [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  • 85.Prez F, Granger BE. IPython: A system for interactive scientific computing. Computing in Science & Engineering. 2007;9:21–29. doi: 10.1109/MCSE.2007.53. [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  • 86.Kluyver, T. et al. Jupyter notebooks – a publishing format for reproducible computational workows. In Loizides, F. & Schmidt, B. (eds.) Positioning and Power in Academic Publishing: Players, Agents and Agendas, 87–90 (IOS Press, 2016).
  • 87.Wahl R, Vogtenhuber D, Kresse G. SrTiO3 and BaTiO3 revisited using the projector augmented wave method: Performance of hybrid and semilocal functionals. Phys. Rev. B. 2008;78:104116. doi: 10.1103/PhysRevB.78.104116. [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  • 88.Zhang Y, Sun J, Perdew JP, Wu X. Comparative first-principles studies of prototypical ferroelectric materials by LDA, GGA, and SCAN meta-GGA. Phys. Rev. B. 2017;96:035143. doi: 10.1103/PhysRevB.96.035143. [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  • 89.Yang Q, Cao JX, Ma Y, Zhou YC. First principles study of polarization-strain coupling in SrBi2Ta2O9. AIP Advances. 2013;3:052134. doi: 10.1063/1.4808215. [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  • 90.Lebedev AI. Ferroelectric phase transition in orthorhombic CdTiO3: First-principles studies. Physics of the Solid State. 2009;51:802–809. doi: 10.1134/S1063783409040283. [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  • 91.Baettig P, Schelle CF, LeSar R, Waghmare UV, Spaldin NA. Theoretical prediction of new high-performance lead-free piezoelectrics. Chemistry of Materials. 2005;17:1376–1380. doi: 10.1021/cm0480418. [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  • 92.Adachi, M. et al. Mg3B7O13Cl [F], 18A-1: Datasheet from Landolt-Börnstein - Group III Condensed Matter · Volume 36A2: “Oxides” in SpringerMaterials (2002).
  • 93.Adachi, M. et al. BaTiO3 (cubic) [F] Survey, 1A-10: Datasheet from Landolt-Börnstein - Group III Condensed Matter · Volume 36A1: “Oxides” in SpringerMaterials (2001).
  • 94.Adachi, M. et al. PbBi2Nb2O9 [(F)], 9A-10: Datasheet from Landolt-Börnstein - Group III Condensed Matter · Volume 36A2: “Oxides” in SpringerMaterials (2002).
  • 95.Adachi, M. et al. SrBi2Ta2O9 [F], 9A-12: Datasheet from Landolt-Börnstein - Group III Condensed Matter · Volume 36A2: “Oxides” in SpringerMaterials (2002).
  • 96.Adachi, M. et al. Bi4Ti3O12 [F], 9A-15: Datasheet from Landolt-Börnstein - Group III Condensed Matter · Volume 36A2: “Oxides” in SpringerMaterials (2002).
  • 97.Deguchi, K., Hasebe, K., Gesi, K. & Asahi, T. 39A-16 K2ZnBr4[F]: Datasheet from Landolt-Börnstein - Group III Condensed Matter · Volume 36B2: “Inorganic Substances other than Oxides” in SpringerMaterials (2005).
  • 98.Shiozaki, Y. & Asahi, T. 50A-1: 1-6 SC(NH2)2[F]: Datasheet from Landolt-Börnstein - Group III Condensed Matter · Volume 36C: “Organic crystals, liquid crystals and polymers” in SpringerMaterials (2006).
  • 99.Adachi, M. et al. Oxides · CdTiO3, 1A-9: Datasheet from Landolt-Börnstein - Group III Condensed Matter · Volume 36A1: “Oxides” in SpringerMaterials (2001).
  • 100.Deguchi, K., Hasebe, K., Gesi, K. & Asahi, T. 39A-9 K2ZnCl4[F]: Datasheet from Landolt-Börnstein - Group III Condensed Matter · Volume 36B2: “Inorganic Substances other than Oxides” in SpringerMaterials (2005).
  • 101.Deguchi, K., Hasebe, K., Gesi, K. & Asahi, T. 39A-10 Rb2ZnCl4[F]: Datasheet from Landolt-Börnstein - Group III Condensed Matter · Volume 36B2: “Inorganic Substances other than Oxides” in SpringerMaterials (2005).
  • 102.Deguchi, K., Hasebe, K., Gesi, K. & Asahi, T. 39A-1 (NH4)2SO4[F]: Datasheet from Landolt-Börnstein - Group III Condensed Matter · Volume 36B2: “Inorganic Substances other than Oxides” in SpringerMaterials (2005).
  • 103.Adachi, M. et al. PbHfO3 [(A)], 1A-16: Datasheet from Landolt-Börnstein - Group III Condensed Matter · Volume 36A1: “Oxides” in SpringerMaterials (2001).
  • 104.Deguchi, K., Hasebe, K., Gesi, K. & Asahi, T. 39A-2 K2SeO4[F]: Datasheet from Landolt-Börnstein - Group III Condensed Matter · Volume 36B2: “Inorganic Substances other than Oxides” in SpringerMaterials (2005).
  • 105.Adachi, M. et al. Oxides _ KNbO3 [F], 1A-2: Datasheet from Landolt-Börnstein - Group III Condensed Matter · Volume 36A1: “Oxides” in Springer Materials (2001).
  • 106.Wemple S, DiDomenico M, Jr., Camlibel I. Relationship between linear and quadratic electro-optic coefficients in linbo3, litao3, and other oxygen-octahedra ferroelectrics based on direct measurement of spontaneous polarization. Applied Physics Letters. 1968;12:209–211. doi: 10.1063/1.1651955. [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  • 107.Adachi, M. et al. LiNbO3 [F] Survey, 2A-1: Datasheet from Landolt-Börnstein - Group III Condensed Matter · Volume 36A1: “Oxides” in Springer Materials (2001).
  • 108.Adachi, M. et al. SbNbO4 [F, (A)], 5A-2: Datasheet from Landolt-Börnstein - Group III Condensed Matter · Volume 36A2: “Oxides” in Springer Materials (2002).
  • 109.Adachi, M. et al. PbTiO3 [F], 1A-11: Datasheet from Landolt-Börnstein - Group III Condensed Matter · Volume 36A1: “Oxides” in Springer Materials (2001).
  • 110.Terauchi H, et al. EXAFS Studies on Amorphous PbTiO3. Journal of the Physical Society of Japan. 1981;50:3977–3979. doi: 10.1143/JPSJ.50.3977. [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  • 111.Adachi, M. et al. PbZrO3 [A], 1A-15: Datasheet from Landolt-Börnstein - Group III Condensed Matter · Volume 36A1: “Oxides” in Springer Materials (2001).
  • 112.Hikita, T. 35A-13 TlTiOPO4[(F)]: Datasheet from Landolt-Börnstein - Group III Condensed Matter · Volume 36B1: “Inorganic Substances other than Oxides. Part 1: SbSI family... TAAP” in SpringerMaterials (2004).
  • 113.Adachi, M. et al. Sr2Ta2O7 [F], 8A-6: Datasheet from Landolt-Börnstein - Group III Condensed Matter · Volume 36A2: “Oxides” in SpringerMaterials (2002).
  • 114.Abrahams SC. Systematic prediction of new ferroelectrics in space group R3. I. Acta crystallographica. Section B, Structural science. 2006;62(Pt 1):26–41. doi: 10.1107/S0108768105040577. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 115.Huang SY, Von Der Mühll R, Ravez J, Hagenmuller P. Structural, ferroelectric and pyroelectric properties of nonstoichiometric ceramics based on BaAl2O4. Journal of Physics and Chemistry of Solids. 1994;55:119–124. doi: 10.1016/0022-3697(94)90192-9. [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  • 116.Machida M. Rotational Dynamics of Trimethylammonium Chloride Studied by MD Simulation and NMR. Ferroelectrics. 2006;338:205–209. doi: 10.1080/00150190600740184. [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  • 117.Smith EH, Benedek NA, Fennie CJ. Interplay of octahedral rotations and lone pair ferroelectricity in CsPbF3. Inorganic Chemistry. 2015;54:8536–8543. doi: 10.1021/acs.inorgchem.5b01213. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 118.Yelisseyev AP, et al. Structures and optical properties of two phases of srmgf4. Phys. Chem. Chem. Phys. 2015;17:500–508. doi: 10.1039/C4CP04689G. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]

Associated Data

This section collects any data citations, data availability statements, or supplementary materials included in this article.

Data Citations

  1. Smidt TE, Mack SA, Reyes-Lillo SE, Jain A, Neaton JB. 2019. Ferroelectric search distortion and workow data and VASP files. figshare. [DOI]
  2. Smidt TE, Mack SA, Reyes-Lillo SE, Jain A, Neaton J. 2019. B. blondegeek/ferroelectric search site: Ferroelectric Search Site. Zenodo. [DOI]

Data Availability Statement

VASP version 5.3.5 used to perform DFT calculations is a proprietary code. The Bilbao Crystallographic Server (BCS) is freely available on-line at http://www.cryst.ehu.es. Fireworks, atomate, and pymatgen are python packages accessible on GitHub. Fireworks and atomate are released under a modified Berkeley Software Distribution (BSD) License. pymatgen is released under a Massachusetts Institute of Technology (MIT) License. Both MIT and BSD licenses are open-source and permit both commercial and non-commercial use. Our workflow code is included since atomate version 0.6.7 and our analysis code is available in pymatgen since v2019.2.4. We also use the following python packages in our analysis and Graphical Representation of Results: numpy, scipy, matplotlib, ipython, and jupyter80,8286. These packages are freely available through the Python Package Index (https://pypi.org/).

Our code for recovering the same branch polarization from polarization calculations has been contributed to pymatgen under the pymatgen.analysis.ferroelectricity module. Our code for the DFT and polarization analysis workflows for performing polarization calculations has been contributed to atomate under the atomate.vasp.workflows.base.ferroelectric module. We also provide code for the interface that we used to view our candidates in aggregate. The web interface for the current work is hosted at http://blondegeek.github.io/ferroelectric_search_site/. The code for the interface can be found at http://github.com/blondegeek/ferroelectric_search_site.


Articles from Scientific Data are provided here courtesy of Nature Publishing Group

RESOURCES