MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1628712035 · doi:10.1063/1.2043148

Improving the calculation of rovibrational spectra of five-atom molecules with three identical atoms by using a C3υ(G6) symmetry-adapted grid: Applied to CH3D and CHD3

2005· article· en· W1628712035 on OpenAlexaff
Xiaogang Wang, Tucker Carrington

Bibliographic record

VenueThe Journal of Chemical Physics · 2005
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldChemistry
TopicSpectroscopy and Laser Applications
Canadian institutionsUniversité de Montréal
Fundersnot available
KeywordsRotational–vibrational spectroscopySymmetry (geometry)GridSpectral lineAtom (system on chip)MoleculeAtomic physicsPhysicsMolecular physicsComputer scienceQuantum mechanicsMathematicsGeometry

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In this paper we report two improvements on the approach we have used to compute rovibrational levels of methane and apply the new ideas to calculate rovibrational levels of two methane isotopomers CH3D and CHD3. Both improvements make the bend calculation better. The first improvement is a G6-invariant (or C3upsilon-invariant) grid which is designed such that each point on the grid is mapped to another point on the grid by any of the G6 operations. The second improvement is the use of fast Fourier transform (FFT) to compute the bend potential matrix-vector products. The FFT matrix-vector product is about three and ten times faster than the previous sequential summation method for the J=0 and J>0 cases, respectively. The calculated J=1 rovibrational levels of CH3D and CHD3 on the Schwenke and Partridge [Spectrochim. Acta, Part A 57, 887 (2001)] ab initio potential are in good agreement (within 6 cm(-1) for the levels up to 3000 cm(-1)) with the experimental data. The agreement is even better (within 0.1 cm(-1) for the levels up to 6000 cm(-1)) if the associated J=0 energies are subtracted.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.004
Threshold uncertainty score0.009

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0020.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.001

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.

Opus teacher head0.008
GPT teacher head0.234
Teacher spread0.227 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designSimulation or modeling
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

Citations36
Published2005
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueThe Journal of Chemical PhysicsSame topicSpectroscopy and Laser ApplicationsFrench-language works237,207