MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2002151306 · doi:10.1088/0305-4470/36/47/007

An extremely efficient and rapid algorithm for numerical evaluation of three-centre nuclear attraction integrals over Slater-type functions

2003· article· en· W2002151306 on OpenAlexaff
Lilian Berlu, Hassan Safouhi

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Physics A Mathematical and General · 2003
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMathematics
TopicMathematical functions and polynomials
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Alberta
Fundersnot available
KeywordsSlater integralsNonlinear systemAttractionBessel functionMathematicsAlgorithmTransformation (genetics)Quadrature (astronomy)Type (biology)Numerical analysisComputer simulationApplied mathematicsMathematical analysisPhysicsQuantum mechanics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The present work concerns the development of an extremely accurate and rapid algorithm for the numerical evaluation of the three-centre nuclear attraction integrals over Slater-type functions. These integrals are numerous, they occur in many millions of terms, even for small molecules and they require rapid and accurate evaluation. The new algorithm is based on nonlinear transformation methods, on numerical quadrature and on properties of the sine and Bessel functions. The section with numerical results shows the high accuracy and the substantial gain in calculation time realized using the new algorithm. The complete expressions of the three-centre nuclear attraction integrals over B functions and over Slater-type functions are evaluated for different values of the quantum numbers to show the efficiency of the new approach. Numerical results obtained with linear and nonlinear systems and comparisons with numerical results from the literature are listed.

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)0.003
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: none
GenreCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: Methods
Teacher disagreement score0.004
Threshold uncertainty score0.012

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0040.002

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 head0.084
GPT teacher head0.336
Teacher spread0.253 · 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

Citations36
Published2003
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Physics A Mathematical and GeneralSame topicMathematical functions and polynomialsFrench-language works237,207