Symbolic programming language in molecular multicenter integral problem
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract It is well known that in any ab initio molecular orbital (MO) calculation, the major task involves the computation of molecular integrals, among which the computation of three‐center nuclear attraction and Coulomb integrals is the most frequently encountered. As the molecular system becomes larger, computation of these integrals becomes one of the most laborious and time‐consuming steps in molecular systems calculation. Improvement of the computational methods of molecular integrals would be indispensable to further development in computational studies of large molecular systems. To develop fast and accurate algorithms for the numerical evaluation of these integrals over B functions, we used nonlinear transformations for improving convergence of highly oscillatory integrals. These methods form the basis of new methods for solving various problems that were unsolvable otherwise and have many applications as well. To apply these nonlinear transformations, the integrands should satisfy linear differential equations with coefficients having asymptotic power series in the sense of Poincaré, which in their turn should satisfy some limit conditions. These differential equations are very difficult to obtain explicitly. In the case of molecular integrals, we used a symbolic programming language (MAPLE) to demonstrate that all the conditions required to apply these nonlinear transformation methods are satisfied. Differential equations are obtained explicitly, allowing us to demonstrate that the limit conditions are also satisfied. © 2005 Wiley Periodicals, Inc. Int J Quantum Chem, 2006
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 | 0.005 |
| 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 | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.008 | 0.001 |
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".