MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2010708668 · doi:10.1063/1.2814150

On the spin and symmetry adaptation of the density matrix renormalization group method

2008· article· en· W2010708668 on OpenAlexaff
Dominika Zgid, Marcel Nooijen

Bibliographic record

VenueThe Journal of Chemical Physics · 2008
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPhysics and Astronomy
TopicPhysics of Superconductivity and Magnetism
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Waterloo
Fundersnot available
KeywordsDensity matrix renormalization groupSpin (aerodynamics)PhysicsRenormalizationRenormalization groupSinglet stateQuantum mechanicsExcited state

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

We present a spin-adapted density matrix renormalization group (DMRG) algorithm designed to target spin and spatial symmetry states that can be difficult to obtain while using a non-spin-adapted algorithm. The algorithmic modifications that have to be introduced into the usual density matrix renormalization group scheme in order to spin adapt it are discussed, and it is demonstrated that the introduced modifications do not change the overall scaling of the method. The new approach is tested on HNCO, a model system, that has a singlet-triplet curve crossing between states of the same symmetry. The advantages of the spin-adapted DMRG scheme are discussed, and it is concluded that the spin-adapted DMRG method converges better in almost all cases and gives more parallel curves to the full configuration interaction result than the non-spin-adapted method. It is shown that the spin-adapted DMRG energies can be lower than the ones obtained from the non-spin-adapted scheme. Such a counterintuitive result is explained by noting that the spin-adapted method is not a special case of the non-spin-adapted one; consequently, the spin-adapted result is not an upper bound for the non-spin-adapted energy.

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: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.086
Threshold uncertainty score0.183

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 head0.020
GPT teacher head0.254
Teacher spread0.233 · 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

Citations101
Published2008
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueThe Journal of Chemical PhysicsSame topicPhysics of Superconductivity and MagnetismFrench-language works237,207