MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1978929794 · doi:10.1021/ct800123c

Accurate Molecular Polarizabilities Based on Continuum Electrostatics

2008· article· en· W1978929794 on OpenAlexaff
Jean‐François Truchon, Anthony Nicholls, Radu Iftimie, Benoı̂t Roux, Christopher I. Bayly

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Chemical Theory and Computation · 2008
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPhysics and Astronomy
TopicAdvanced Chemical Physics Studies
Canadian institutionsUniversité de Montréal
FundersNational Institute of General Medical Sciences
KeywordsPolarizabilityAnisotropyIntramolecular forcePolarization (electrochemistry)DielectricChemistryElectronic structureMoleculeMolecular physicsComputational chemistryPhysicsQuantum mechanicsPhysical chemistry

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

A novel approach for representing the intramolecular polarizability as a continuum dielectric is introduced to account for molecular electronic polarization. It is shown, using a finite-difference solution to the Poisson equation, that the electronic polarization from internal continuum (EPIC) model yields accurate gas-phase molecular polarizability tensors for a test set of 98 challenging molecules composed of heteroaromatics, alkanes, and diatomics. The electronic polarization originates from a high intramolecular dielectric that produces polarizabilities consistent with B3LYP/aug-cc-pVTZ and experimental values when surrounded by vacuum dielectric. In contrast to other approaches to model electronic polarization, this simple model avoids the polarizability catastrophe and accurately calculates molecular anisotropy with the use of very few fitted parameters and without resorting to auxiliary sites or anisotropic atomic centers. On average, the unsigned error in the average polarizability and anisotropy compared to B3LYP are 2% and 5%, respectively. The correlation between the polarizability components from B3LYP and this approach lead to a R 2 of 0.990 and a slope of 0.999. Even the F 2 anisotropy, shown to be a difficult case for existing polarizability models, can be reproduced within 2% error. In addition to providing new parameters for a rapid method directly applicable to the calculation of polarizabilities, this work extends the widely used Poisson equation to areas where accurate molecular polarizabilities matter.

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: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.439
Threshold uncertainty score0.330

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 integrity0.0000.000
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 head0.007
GPT teacher head0.253
Teacher spread0.245 · 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

Citations22
Published2008
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

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