MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1138545095 · doi:10.1021/acs.jpca.5b07627

Computing the Anharmonic Vibrational Spectrum of UF<sub>6</sub> in 15 Dimensions with an Optimized Basis Set and Rectangular Collocation

2015· article· en· W1138545095 on OpenAlexafffund
Sergei Manzhos, Tucker Carrington, Laura Laverdure, Nicholas J. Mosey

Bibliographic record

VenueThe Journal of Physical Chemistry A · 2015
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPhysics and Astronomy
TopicAdvanced Chemical Physics Studies
Canadian institutionsQueen's University
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of CanadaMinistry of Education - Singapore
KeywordsAnharmonicityBasis (linear algebra)Basis setHermite polynomialsBasis functionAb initioChemistryCurse of dimensionalityCollocation (remote sensing)Potential energy surfaceCoupling (piping)Computational chemistryMathematical analysisQuantum mechanicsPhysicsGeometryMathematicsDensity functional theory

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The anharmonic vibrational spectrum of UF6 is computed in full dimensionality directly from ab initio data, i.e., bypassing the construction of a potential energy surface (PES). The vibrational Schrödinger equation is solved by fitting parameters of an adaptable basis using a modified version of the rectangular collocation algorithm of Manzhos and Carrington (J. Chem. Phys . 2013, 139, 051101). The basis functions are products of parametrized Hermite polynomials that impose approximate nodal structure. The Schrödinger equation is solved in normal coordinates. The results show that anharmonicity and coupling do noticeably affect the vibrational transitions, shifting them by several cm(-1). Although UF6 has 15 coordinates, we compute hundreds of levels with fewer than 1000 basis functions and about 50,000 ab initio points. It is the efficiency of the basis that makes it possible to forego a PES.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: Bench or experimental
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.071
Threshold uncertainty score0.285

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.012
GPT teacher head0.247
Teacher spread0.235 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designBench or experimental
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations35
Published2015
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueThe Journal of Physical Chemistry ASame topicAdvanced Chemical Physics StudiesFrench-language works237,207