MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1970846167 · doi:10.1063/1.1425835

Solutions of mixed quantum-classical dynamics in multiple dimensions using classical trajectories

2002· article· en· W1970846167 on OpenAlexaff
Chuncheng Wan, Jeremy Schofield

Bibliographic record

VenueThe Journal of Chemical Physics · 2002
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPhysics and Astronomy
TopicSpectroscopy and Quantum Chemical Studies
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Toronto
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPhase spaceDegrees of freedom (physics and chemistry)QuantumQuantum dynamicsStatistical physicsOperator (biology)MathematicsClassical mechanicsApplied mathematicsPhysicsQuantum mechanics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The multithreads algorithm for solving the mixed quantum-classical Liouville equation is extended to systems in which multiple classical degrees of freedom couple explicitly to a quantum subsystem. The method involves evolving a discrete set of matrices representing operators positioned at classical phase space coordinates according to precise dynamical rules dictated by evolution equations. The propagation scheme is based on the Trotter expansion of the time evolution operator and involves trajectory (thread) branching and pruning operations at each time step. The method is tested against exact numerical solution of the quantum dynamics for two models in which the nonadiabatic evolution of two heavy coordinates (nuclei) induces changes in population in two electronic states. It is demonstrated that the multithreads algorithm provides a good quantitative as well as qualitative description of the dynamics for branching ratios and populations as a function of time. Critical performance issues such as the computational demand of the method, energy conservation, and how the scheme scales with the number of classical degrees of freedom coupled to the quantum subsystem are discussed.

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 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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
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 score0.320
Threshold uncertainty score0.507

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
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 head0.044
GPT teacher head0.264
Teacher spread0.220 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

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

Citations49
Published2002
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueThe Journal of Chemical PhysicsSame topicSpectroscopy and Quantum Chemical StudiesFrench-language works237,207