MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1984939753 · doi:10.1063/1.1305321

Direct iterative solution of the generalized Bloch equation. II. A general formalism for many-electron systems

2000· article· en· W1984939753 on OpenAlexaff
Holger Meißner, Josef Paldus

Bibliographic record

VenueThe Journal of Chemical Physics · 2000
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPhysics and Astronomy
TopicAdvanced Chemical Physics Studies
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Waterloo
FundersUniversität Regensburg
KeywordsAnsatzCoupled clusterWave functionHamiltonian (control theory)Exponential functionQuadratic equationHermitian matrixGround stateMathematicsQuantum mechanicsPhysicsApplied mathematicsMathematical analysisMathematical optimization

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

A general nonperturbative formulation of the recently proposed [H. Meißner and E. O. Steinborn, Int. J. Quantum Chem. 61, 777 (1997); Part I] quadratic iterative scheme for the wave function expansion coefficients (WECs), enabling a direct solution of the generalized Bloch equation, is given for the ab initio electronic Hamiltonians, thus enabling the computation of the molecular electronic structure. The method exploits the concepts of a multidimensional reference or model space, a (non-Hermitian) effective Hamiltonian, and the generalized Bloch equation. The formulation in terms of WECs provides a considerable freedom in the design of various approximation schemes by combining direct iterations on WECs with their approximation by disconnected cluster components based on the exponential cluster ansatz for the wave operator. The resulting formalism is capable of handling a rather large class of both ground and excited states. While the general formulation represents a multiconfigurational, multireference scheme, a special attention is paid to its two-dimensional state selective or state specific version.

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: Bench or experimental
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.092
Threshold uncertainty score0.423

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 head0.015
GPT teacher head0.257
Teacher spread0.242 · 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

Citations21
Published2000
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

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