A Review of Studies on Strongly‐Coupled Coulomb Systems Since the Rise of DFT and SCCS‐1977
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract The conferences on “Strongly Coupled Coulomb Systems” (SCCS) arose from the “Strongly Coupled Plas‐mas” meetings, inaugurated in 1977. The progress in SCCS theory is reviewed in an ‘author‐centered’ frame to limit its scope. Our efforts, i.e., with François Perrot, sought to apply density functional theory (DFT) to SCCS calculations. DFT was then poised to become the major computational scheme for condensed matter physics. The ion‐sphere models of Salpeter and others evolved into useful average‐atom models for finite‐T Coulomb systems, as in Lieberman's Inferno code. We replaced these by correlation‐sphere models that exploit the description of matter via density functionals linked to pair‐distributions. These methods provided practical computational means for studying strongly interacting electron‐ion Coulomb systems like warm‐dense matter (WDM). The staples of SCCS are wide‐ranged, viz., equation of state, plasma spectroscopy, opacity (absorption, emission), scattering, level shifts, transport properties, e.g., electrical and heat conductivity, laser‐ and shock‐created plasmas, their energy relaxation and transient properties etc. These calculations need pseudopotentials and exchange‐correlation functionals applicable to finite‐T Coulomb systems that may be used in ab initio codes, molecular dynamics, etc. The search for simpler computational schemes has proceeded via proposals for orbital‐free DFT, statistical potentials, classical maps of quantum systems using classical schemes like HNC to include strong coupling effects (CHNC). Laughlin's classical plasma map for the fractional quantum Hall effect (FQHE) is a seminal example where we report new results for graphene. (© 2015 WILEY‐VCH Verlag GmbH & Co. KGaA, Weinheim)
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 machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.004 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 0.001 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".