Bibliographic record
Abstract
First-principles derivation is given for the heuristic exchange-hole model of London dispersion forces by Becke and Johnson [J. Chem. Phys. 122, 154104 (2005)]. A one-term approximation is used for the dynamic charge density response function, and it is shown that a central nonempirical ingredient of the approximate nonexpanded dispersion energy is the charge density autocorrelation function, a two-particle property, related to the exchange-correlation hole. In the framework of a dipolar approximation of the Coulomb interaction around the molecular origin, one obtains the so-called Salem-Tang-Karplus approximation to the C(6) dispersion coefficient. Alternatively, by expanding the Coulomb interaction around the center of charge (centroid) of the exchange-correlation hole associated with each point in the molecular volume, a multicenter expansion is obtained around the centroids of electron localization domains, always in terms of the exchange-correlation hole. In order to get a formula analogous to that of Becke and Johnson, which involves the exchange-hole only, further assumptions are needed, related to the difficulties of obtaining the expectation value of a two-electron operator from a single determinant. Thus a connection could be established between the conventional fluctuating charge density model of London dispersion forces and the notion of the "exchange-hole dipole moment" shedding some light on the true nature of the approximations implicit in the Becke-Johnson model.
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 | 0.001 |
| 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 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.010 | 0.003 |
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.
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".