MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1999035781 · doi:10.1063/1.3246593

Nonproduct quadrature grids for solving the vibrational Schrödinger equation

2009· article· en· W1999035781 on OpenAlexafffund
Gustavo Avila, Tucker Carrington

Bibliographic record

VenueThe Journal of Chemical Physics · 2009
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPhysics and Astronomy
TopicAdvanced Chemical Physics Studies
Canadian institutionsQueen's University
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of CanadaCanada Research Chairs
KeywordsQuadrature (astronomy)Hamiltonian (control theory)GridMathematicsSchrödinger equationGauss–Laguerre quadratureGaussBasis (linear algebra)Tanh-sinh quadratureMatrix (chemical analysis)Matrix multiplicationGaussian quadratureBasis setMathematical analysisNyström methodQuantum mechanicsPhysicsIntegral equationGeometryMathematical optimizationChemistryOpticsMolecule

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The size of the quadrature grid required to compute potential matrix elements impedes solution of the vibrational Schrodinger equation if the potential does not have a simple form. This quadrature grid-size problem can make computing (ro)vibrational spectra impossible even if the size of the basis used to construct the Hamiltonian matrix is itself manageable. Potential matrix elements are typically computed with a direct product Gauss quadrature whose grid size scales as N(D), where N is the number of points per coordinate and D is the number of dimensions. In this article we demonstrate that this problem can be mitigated by using a pruned basis set and a nonproduct Smolyak grid. The constituent 1D quadratures are designed for the weight functions important for vibrational calculations. For the SF(6) stretch problem (D=6) we obtain accurate results with a grid that is more than two orders of magnitude smaller than the direct product Gauss grid. If D>6 we expect an even bigger reduction.

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)0.004
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: Methods
Teacher disagreement score0.003
Threshold uncertainty score0.009

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.004
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0000.001
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 head0.018
GPT teacher head0.269
Teacher spread0.250 · 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 designSimulation or modeling
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

Citations116
Published2009
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

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