MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2027356989 · doi:10.1002/wcms.73

Computing ro‐vibrational spectra of van der Waals molecules

2011· article· en· W2027356989 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueWiley Interdisciplinary Reviews Computational Molecular Science · 2011
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPhysics and Astronomy
TopicAdvanced Chemical Physics Studies
Canadian institutionsQueen's University
Fundersnot available
Keywordsvan der Waals forceIntramolecular forceVan der Waals surfaceMoleculeSpectral lineChemistryKinetic energyVan der Waals strainComputational chemistryBasis (linear algebra)PhysicsVan der Waals radiusQuantum mechanicsMathematicsGeometry

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract This article reviews methods for computing ro‐vibrational spectra of van der Waals molecules. Due to the presence of large‐amplitude motion, calculations often play an important role in assigning and understanding the spectra of van der Waals molecules. Fortunately, it is possible to make usefully accurate calculations because important parts of the spectrum can be understood by doing calculations that omit the intramolecular coordinates. In this article, we present new ideas for deriving kinetic energy operators and discuss choosing basis functions and doing the matrix–vector products that are required to obtain a spectrum using the Lanczos algorithm. © 2011 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd. WIREs Comput Mol Sci 2011 1 952–963 DOI: 10.1002/wcms.73 This article is categorized under: Theoretical and Physical Chemistry > Spectroscopy

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.

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: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: Theoretical or conceptual
GenreCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.814
Threshold uncertainty score0.876

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.001
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 head0.026
GPT teacher head0.312
Teacher spread0.287 · 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