MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1642259619 · doi:10.1063/1.1305323

Direct iterative solution of the generalized Bloch equation. IV. Application to H2, LiH, BeH, and CH2

2000· article· en· W1642259619 on OpenAlexaff
Holger Meißner, Josef Paldus

Bibliographic record

VenueThe Journal of Chemical Physics · 2000
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPhysics and Astronomy
TopicAdvanced Chemical Physics Studies
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Waterloo
FundersUniversität Regensburg
KeywordsExcited stateCoupled clusterOpen shellAb initioGround statePhysicsMultiplicity (mathematics)Iterative methodConfiguration interactionQuantum mechanicsMathematicsMathematical analysisMoleculeAlgorithm

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The state selective, one- and two-determinantal versions of the recently proposed direct iterative approach to the solution of the generalized Bloch equation [H. Meißner and J. Paldus, J. Chem. Phys. 113, 2612 (2000); Part II] are applied to the ground and excited states of several test molecular ab initio models for which the exact full configuration interaction results are available. Both closed- and open-shell states of different spin multiplicity are considered, as well as the excited states belonging to the same symmetry species as does the ground state. The versatility and flexibility of this approach stems from the possibility of introducing the cluster expansion based approximations of highly excited clusters at various levels of the iterative scheme, leading to a sequence of approximations including both the configuration interaction and coupled cluster methods with singles and doubles as a special case. Both the reliability and the efficiency of these various approximations is examined, and potentially promising approximation schemes are identified.

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)0.003
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 score0.007
Threshold uncertainty score0.013

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.001
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 head0.011
GPT teacher head0.251
Teacher spread0.240 · 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

Citations21
Published2000
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueThe Journal of Chemical PhysicsSame topicAdvanced Chemical Physics StudiesFrench-language works237,207