MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1966939946 · doi:10.1063/1.3021471

Using neural networks, optimized coordinates, and high-dimensional model representations to obtain a vinyl bromide potential surface

2008· article· en· W1966939946 on OpenAlexaff
Sergei Manzhos, Tucker Carrington

Bibliographic record

VenueThe Journal of Chemical Physics · 2008
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMaterials Science
TopicMachine Learning in Materials Science
Canadian institutionsQueen's UniversityUniversité de Montréal
Fundersnot available
KeywordsSurface (topology)Set (abstract data type)Artificial neural networkPotential energy surfaceComputer scienceAlgorithmApplied mathematicsAb initioMathematicsPhysicsQuantum mechanicsGeometryArtificial intelligence

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

We demonstrate that it is possible to obtain good potentials using high-dimensional model representations (HDMRs) fitted with neural networks (NNs) from data in 12 dimensions and 15 dimensions. The HDMR represents the potential as a sum of lower-dimensional functions and our NN-based approach makes it possible to obtain all of these functions from one set of fitting points. To reduce the number of terms in the HDMR, we use optimized redundant coordinates. By using exponential neurons, one obtains a potential in sum-of-products form, which greatly facilitates quantum dynamics calculations. A 12-dimensional (reference) potential surface for vinyl bromide is first refitted to show that it can be represented as a sum of two-dimensional functions. To fit 3d functions of the original coordinates, to improve the potential, a huge amount of data would be required. Redundant coordinates avoid this problem. They enable us to bypass the combinatorial explosion of the number of terms which plagues all HDMR and multimode-type methods. We also fit to a set of approximately 70,000 ab initio points for vinyl bromide in 15 dimensions [M. Malshe et al., J. Chem. Phys. 127, 134105 (2007)] and show that it is possible to obtain a surface in sum-of-products form of quality similar to the quality of the full-dimensional fit. Although we obtain a full-dimensional surface, we limit the cost of the fitting by building it from fits of six-dimensional functions, each of which requires only a small NN.

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 score0.003
Threshold uncertainty score0.007

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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 head0.025
GPT teacher head0.279
Teacher spread0.254 · 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

Citations110
Published2008
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueThe Journal of Chemical PhysicsSame topicMachine Learning in Materials ScienceFrench-language works237,207