MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1996757497 · doi:10.1063/1.3658643

Calculation of the exchange coupling constants of copper binuclear systems based on spin-flip constricted variational density functional theory

2011· article· en· W1996757497 on OpenAlexafffund
Hristina R. Zhekova, Michael Seth, Tom Ziegler

Bibliographic record

VenueThe Journal of Chemical Physics · 2011
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPhysics and Astronomy
TopicAdvanced Chemical Physics Studies
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Calgary
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of CanadaCanada Research ChairsWestern Canada Research Grid
KeywordsDensity functional theoryPerturbation theory (quantum mechanics)Coupling constantCopperWave functionChemistryCoupling (piping)Computational chemistryMolecular physicsThermodynamicsAtomic physicsQuantum mechanicsPhysicsMaterials science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

We have recently developed a methodology for the calculation of exchange coupling constants J in weakly interacting polynuclear metal clusters. The method is based on unrestricted and restricted second order spin-flip constricted variational density functional theory (SF-CV(2)-DFT) and is here applied to eight binuclear copper systems. Comparison of the SF-CV(2)-DFT results with experiment and with results obtained from other DFT and wave function based methods has been made. Restricted SF-CV(2)-DFT with the BH&HLYP functional yields consistently J values in excellent agreement with experiment. The results acquired from this scheme are comparable in quality to those obtained by accurate multi-reference wave function methodologies such as difference dedicated configuration interaction and the complete active space with second-order perturbation theory.

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 score0.005
Threshold uncertainty score0.010

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0020.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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 head0.026
GPT teacher head0.230
Teacher spread0.204 · 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

Citations29
Published2011
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

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