MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1974697868 · doi:10.1080/00268970500084034

Correlated exponential-basis integrals with logarithmic integrands

2005· article· en· W1974697868 on OpenAlexafffund
Frank E. Harris, Vedene H. Smith, Alexei M. Frolov

Bibliographic record

VenueMolecular Physics · 2005
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPhysics and Astronomy
TopicAtomic and Molecular Physics
Canadian institutionsQueen's University
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of CanadaNational Science Foundation
KeywordsExponential functionWave functionBasis (linear algebra)GeneralizationLogarithmComputationMathematicsPhysicsMathematical analysisQuantum mechanicsGeometry

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Formulas are derived for three-body integrals containing all the interparticle coordinates as exponentials and with one coordinate also entering logarithmically. These integrals are relevant to the computation of relativistic and quantum electrodynamic effects in two-electron systems, and can contribute to an assessment of current approaches for the treatment of such effects. The present work is a generalization of earlier studies by others using Hylleraas wavefunctions (those in which only two of the three interparticle coordinates exhibit exponential dependence). Alternate formulations are developed to yield stability for all values of the parameters. The formulas have been checked by intercomparison of different methods, by agreement with three-dimensional numerical integration, and by their reduction to limiting cases corresponding to Hylleraas integrals. Representative integrals have been tabulated to illustrate the issues governing the choice of optimum formulas.

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)0.003
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.012
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: Theoretical or conceptual
GenreCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: Methods
Teacher disagreement score0.012
Threshold uncertainty score0.040

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.012
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0020.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0030.003
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0020.004
Open science0.0030.002
Research integrity0.0010.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0120.005

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 head0.004
GPT teacher head0.207
Teacher spread0.202 · 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 designTheoretical or conceptual
Domainnot available
GenreMethods

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

Citations1
Published2005
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueMolecular PhysicsSame topicAtomic and Molecular PhysicsFrench-language works237,207