MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1496054794 · doi:10.1063/1.1356019

Coupled-perturbed Hartree–Fock theory for infinite periodic systems: Calculation of static electric properties of (LiH)n, (FH)n, (H2O)n, (–CNH–)n, and (–CH=CH–)n

2001· article· en· W1496054794 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.
fundA Canadian funder is recorded on the work.

Bibliographic record

VenueThe Journal of Chemical Physics · 2001
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMaterials Science
TopicNonlinear Optical Materials Research
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Ottawa
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada
KeywordsHyperpolarizabilityPolarizabilityDipoleMoment (physics)Hartree–Fock methodExtrapolationOligomerChemistryComputational chemistryElectronic correlationMolecular physicsQuantum mechanicsPhysicsMoleculeMathematicsOrganic chemistryMathematical analysis

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Previously we have shown how to obtain the electric properties of a polymer or other periodic system at the coupled Hartree–Fock level by direct, analytical calculation rather than by extrapolation of oligomer results. Here we add computationally simpler noniterative formulas and test the methodology for the longitudinal dipole moment (μ), polarizability (α), first hyperpolarizability (β), and second hyperpolarizability (γ) of five quasilinear polymers: (LiH)n, (FH)n, (H2O)n, trans-polymethineimine (–CNH–)n, and trans-polyacetylene (–CH=CH–)n. The polymer values are in good agreement with large-oligomer calculations. In this connection the role of phase factors, particularly in determining the dipole moment, is elucidated. We are now in a good position to include electron correlation using methods analogous to those employed for molecular systems.

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.

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)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
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 score0.012
Threshold uncertainty score0.444

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
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 head0.030
GPT teacher head0.280
Teacher spread0.249 · 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