MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1976280939 · doi:10.1021/ct401060m

Generalized Energy-Based Fragmentation CCSD(T)-F12a Method and Application to the Relative Energies of Water Clusters (H<sub>2</sub>O)<sub>20</sub>

2014· article· en· W1976280939 on OpenAlexaff
Kedong Wang, Wei Li, Shuhua Li

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Chemical Theory and Computation · 2014
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPhysics and Astronomy
TopicAdvanced Chemical Physics Studies
Canadian institutionsMinistry of Education and Child Care
FundersNational Natural Science Foundation of China
KeywordsFragmentation (computing)Cluster (spacecraft)PhysicsEnergy (signal processing)Atomic physicsStatistical physicsChemistryComputational chemistryComputer scienceQuantum mechanics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The generalized energy-based fragmentation (GEBF) approach has been implemented for the explicitly correlated F12a of coupled-cluster with the noniterative triples corrections [CCSD(T)-F12a] method for medium- and large-sized systems. By combining the canonical Hartree-Fock (HF) total energies and the GEBF-X correlation energies, the GEBF-X/HF method is illustrated to be more accurate than the origin GEBF-X method, where X could be any electron correlation method, such as second-order Møller-Plesset perturbation theory (MP2), MP2-F12, CCSD(T), and CCSD(T)-F12a. By combining the GEBF-X/HF results at the MP2-F12 and CCSD(T)-F12a levels, we can approximately achieve the CCSD(T) complete basis set (CBS) limit. Our test calculations for 10 low-energy isomers of water 20-mers show that for the relative energies of large water clusters, both the basis set and high-level electron correlation effects should be taken into account, in which the former is even more important. In addition, the GEBF-CCSD(T)/HF method at the CBS limit is used to evaluate 32 levels of density functional theory (DFT) methods. The results show that the DFT methods are difficult to predict the relative energies between the isomers of water 20-mers. The GEBF-CCSD(T)/HF method at the CBS limit is expected to be a benchmark for DFT and other electron correlation methods for medium- and large-sized systems with complex structures, in which both the basis set and electron correlation effects are important.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
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 score0.012
Threshold uncertainty score0.025

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.002
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0020.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0070.001

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 head0.005
GPT teacher head0.251
Teacher spread0.246 · 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

Citations68
Published2014
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Chemical Theory and ComputationSame topicAdvanced Chemical Physics StudiesFrench-language works237,207