MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2014799552 · doi:10.1103/physrevb.63.174103

Symmetry-general least-squares extraction of elastic coefficients from<i>ab initio</i>total energy calculations

2001· article· en· W2014799552 on OpenAlexaff
Y. Le Page, Paul Saxe

Bibliographic record

VenuePhysical review. B, Condensed matter · 2001
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMaterials Science
TopicX-ray Diffraction in Crystallography
Canadian institutionsNational Research Council Canada
Fundersnot available
KeywordsTriclinic crystal systemSymmetry (geometry)Ab initioPhysicsAb initio quantum chemistry methodsTetragonal crystal systemEnergy (signal processing)Mathematical analysisMathematicsQuantum mechanicsGeometry

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

A symmetry-general scheme for the simultaneous least-squares extraction of the elastic coefficients and of the residual strain components from ab initio total energy calculations on crystal structure models of materials is proposed. It is quite efficient and avoids error propagation. An appropriate, but usually singular, set of normal equations is first formulated in a triclinic framework, with 21 stiffness coefficients and 6 residual strain components. Rank reduction of this $27\ifmmode\times\else\texttimes\fi{}27$ least-squares system of normal equations is then performed through systematic implementation of the constraints corresponding to the known symmetry of the material. A regular $p\ifmmode\times\else\texttimes\fi{}p$ matrix is obtained through this process, where p is the total number of independent coefficients and components. This computationally robust approach to the extraction of elastic coefficients and their standard deviations can be used to analyze any number of adequately selected and weighted values of the total energy that is larger than the number of independent parameters. It also provides values for the minimum energy and for the corresponding cell data, again with standard errors. The present work enables the automated calculation of elastic coefficients from crystals with any symmetry through a single logical flow. Examples are given for a few cubic, hexagonal, rhombohedral, tetragonal, and orthorhombic materials with known experimental stiffness values. It would be difficult to exaggerate the convenience of the automated implementation of this symmetry-general approach based on total energy calculations.

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: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.006
Threshold uncertainty score0.018

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0020.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0060.003

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 head0.016
GPT teacher head0.310
Teacher spread0.294 · 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
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

Citations291
Published2001
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuePhysical review. B, Condensed matterSame topicX-ray Diffraction in CrystallographyFrench-language works237,207