MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2033914019 · doi:10.1135/cccc2010151

Potential energy curve of N2 revisited

2011· article· en· W2033914019 on OpenAlexaff
V. Špirko, Xiangzhu Li, Josef Paldus

Bibliographic record

VenueCollection of Czechoslovak Chemical Communications · 2011
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPhysics and Astronomy
TopicAdvanced Chemical Physics Studies
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Waterloo
Fundersnot available
KeywordsCoupled clusterPotential energyBasis setAtomic physicsBasis (linear algebra)Ground stateChemistryPhysicsStatistical physicsMoleculeComputational chemistryQuantum mechanicsMathematicsGeometry

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Recently generated ground state potential energy curves (PECs) for the nitrogen molecule, as obtained with the reduced multireference (RMR) coupled-cluster (CC) method with singles and doubles (RMR-CCSD), and its version corrected for the secondary triples RMR-CCSD(T), using cc-pVXZ basis sets with X = D, T, and Q, as well as the extrapolated complete basis set (cbs) limit (X. Li and J. Paldus: J. Chem. Phys. 2008 , 129 , 054104), are compared with both the highly accurate theoretical configuration interaction PEC of Gdanitz ( Chem. Phys. Lett. 1998 , 283 , 253) and analytic PECs obtained by fitting an extensive set of experimental data (R. J. Le Roy et al.: J. Chem. Phys. 2006 , 125 , 164310). These results are analyzed using a morphing procedure based on the reduced potential curve (RPC) method of Jenč. It is found that an RPC fit of both theoretical potentials can be achieved with only a few parameters. The RMR PECs are found to provide an excellent description of experimentally available vibrational levels, but significantly deviate from those of Gdanitz’s PEC for highly stretched geometries, yet still do provide a qualitatively correct PECs that lie within the region delimited by Le Roy’s analytical PECs.

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 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: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: Bench or experimental
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.849
Threshold uncertainty score0.567

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 studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.000
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 head0.025
GPT teacher head0.265
Teacher spread0.240 · 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

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designBench or experimental
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations3
Published2011
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCollection of Czechoslovak Chemical CommunicationsSame topicAdvanced Chemical Physics StudiesFrench-language works237,207