Recurrence relations for one-dimensional harmonic oscillator matrix elements of Gaussian and exponential operators
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This paper reports the development of several general recurrence relations that can be used to evaluate one-dimensional, three centre harmonic oscillator matrix elements of the operators and f = exp(−cx C ). The matrix elements have the general form ⟨φ m (a 1/2 x A )|g(or f)|φ n (b 1/2 x B )⟩; φ m is the harmonic oscillator basis function for an eigenstate m. The coordinates are x A = x − A x , and so on, where A x , B x , and C x are points of reference for the displacement of a common atom whose instantaneous coordinate is x. A typical case might be that of a hydrogen atom referred to two wells located at A x and B x , and a second atom located at C x on the x axis. The recurrence relations apply to all cases including the two centre A x = B x and overlap integrals, A x ≠ B x , c = 0, and C x = 0. Moreover, the recurrence relations can generate matrix elements to any order. The applications of some of these recursions are illustrated with several examples: (1) the variational treatment of the Morse oscillator using one-dimensional harmonic oscillator basis functions; (2) the development of a model of the Morse oscillator in Gaussian coordinates together with (3) the variational analysis of that model. In addition, (4) the simplest version of a symmetric double potential well system is examined using both the Morse oscillator and the model potential.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.003 | 0.008 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.006 | 0.002 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".