Computing resonance energies, widths, and wave functions using a Lanczos method in real arithmetic
Bibliographic record
Abstract
We introduce new ideas for calculating resonance energies and widths. It is shown that a non-Hermitian-Lanczos approach can be used to compute eigenvalues of H+W, where H is the Hamiltonian and W is a complex absorbing potential (CAP), without evaluating complex matrix-vector products. This is done by exploiting the link between a CAP-modified Hamiltonian matrix and a real but nonsymmetric matrix U suggested by Mandelshtam and Neumaier [J. Theor. Comput. Chem. 1, 1 (2002)] and using a coupled-two-term Lanczos procedure. We use approximate resonance eigenvectors obtained from the non-Hermitian-Lanczos algorithm and a very good CAP to obtain very accurate energies and widths without solving eigenvalue problems for many values of the CAP strength parameter and searching for cusps. The method is applied to the resonances of HCO. We compare properties of the method with those of established approaches.
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 | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.005 | 0.002 |
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.
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".