Binding in transition metal complexes: Reduced multireference coupled-cluster study of the MCH2+ (M=Sc to Cu) compounds
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The recently developed reduced multireference coupled-cluster method with singles and doubles (RMR CCSD), which is perturbatively corrected for triples [RMR CCSD(T)], is employed to compute binding energies of nine transition metal ions with CH2. Unlike analogous compounds involving main-group elements, the MCH2+ (M=Sc to Cu) transition metal complexes often exhibit a non-negligible multireference character. The authors thus employ the RMR CCSD(T) method, which represents an extension of the standard single-reference (SR) CCSD(T) method and can account for multireference effects, while employing only small reference spaces. In this way the role of quasidegeneracy effects on the binding energies of these complexes can be assessed at a higher SD(T) level than is possible with the widely used ab initio methods, namely, with the standard SR CCSD(T) approach, and provide a new benchmark for these quantities. The difference between the RMR and the standard CCSD(T) methods becomes particularly evident when considering nonequilibrium geometries.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".