MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1992085694 · doi:10.1002/qua.21746

Coupled‐cluster approach to spontaneous symmetry breaking in molecules: The linear N<sub>3</sub> radical

2008· article· en· W1992085694 on OpenAlexaff
Xiangzhu Li, Josef Paldus

Bibliographic record

VenueInternational Journal of Quantum Chemistry · 2008
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPhysics and Astronomy
TopicAdvanced Chemical Physics Studies
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Waterloo
FundersRocky Mountain Research Station
KeywordsSymmetry breakingAntisymmetric relationCoupled clusterSymmetry (geometry)Gravitational singularityPhysicsVariety (cybernetics)Cluster (spacecraft)QuantumChemistryQuantum mechanicsMoleculeMathematical physicsGeometryComputer scienceMathematics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Symmetry‐breaking phenomena that often affect calculation of potentials for the linear ABA species along the antisymmetric‐stretching coordinate are examined for the case of the ground state of the N3 radical using various coupled‐cluster methods and molecular orbitals. The difficulties that are encountered when employing UHF‐type approaches are found to be particularly striking. It is shown that the inconsistencies that arise when relying on a numerical differentiation can be overcome by exploiting the computed potentials in the Schrödinger equation for the nuclear motion. This approach yields reliable values for the vibrational levels even in the presence of singularities that plague the UHF‐based potentials. The variety of the symmetry‐breaking phenomena that occur for these systems, including the notoriously intricate BNB radical, are briefly discussed. © 2008 Wiley Periodicals, Inc. Int J Quantum Chem, 2008

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: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.012
Threshold uncertainty score0.023

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 science0.0020.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.000

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 head0.012
GPT teacher head0.253
Teacher spread0.241 · 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
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

Citations14
Published2008
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueInternational Journal of Quantum ChemistrySame topicAdvanced Chemical Physics StudiesFrench-language works237,207