MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1979034692 · doi:10.1063/1.2817582

Development of the cyclic cluster model formalism for Kohn-Sham auxiliary density functional theory methods

2008· article· en· W1979034692 on OpenAlexaff
Florian Janetzko, Andreas M. Köster, Dennis R. Salahub

Bibliographic record

VenueThe Journal of Chemical Physics · 2008
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPhysics and Astronomy
TopicAdvanced Chemical Physics Studies
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Calgary
FundersConsejo Nacional de Ciencia y TecnologíaDeutsche Forschungsgemeinschaft
KeywordsCoupled clusterKohn–Sham equationsDensity functional theoryFormalism (music)Periodic boundary conditionsWeightingElectronic structurePhysicsTranslational symmetryComputational chemistryChemistryQuantum mechanicsBoundary value problemMoleculeCondensed matter physics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The development of the cyclic cluster model (CCM) formalism for Kohn-Sham auxiliary density functional theory (KS-ADFT) methods is presented. The CCM is a direct space approach for the calculation of perfect and defective systems under periodic boundary conditions. Translational symmetry is introduced in the CCM by integral weighting. A consistent weighting scheme for all two-center and three-center interactions appearing in the KS-ADFT method is presented. For the first time, an approach for the numerical integration of the exchange-correlation potential within the cyclic cluster formalism is derived. The presented KS-ADFT CCM implementation was applied to covalent periodic systems. The results of cyclic and molecular cluster model (MCM) calculations for trans-polyacetylene, graphene, and diamond are discussed as examples for systems periodic in one, two, and three dimensions, respectively. All structures were optimized. It is shown that the CCM results represent the results of MCM calculations in the limit of infinite molecular clusters. By analyzing the electronic structure, we demonstrate that the symmetry of the corresponding periodic systems is retained in CCM calculations. The obtained geometric and electronic structures are compared with available data from the literature.

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)0.001
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: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: Theoretical or conceptual
GenreCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: Methods
Teacher disagreement score0.004
Threshold uncertainty score0.012

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0030.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.001

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 head0.039
GPT teacher head0.299
Teacher spread0.260 · 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

Citations19
Published2008
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueThe Journal of Chemical PhysicsSame topicAdvanced Chemical Physics StudiesFrench-language works237,207