Using a pruned basis, a non-product quadrature grid, and the exact Watson normal-coordinate kinetic energy operator to solve the vibrational Schrödinger equation for C2H4
Bibliographic record
Abstract
In this paper we propose and test a method for computing numerically exact vibrational energy levels of a molecule with six atoms. We use a pruned product basis, a non-product quadrature, the Lanczos algorithm, and the exact normal-coordinate kinetic energy operator (KEO) with the π(t)μπ term. The Lanczos algorithm is applied to a Hamiltonian with a KEO for which μ is evaluated at equilibrium. Eigenvalues and eigenvectors obtained from this calculation are used as a basis to obtain the final energy levels. The quadrature scheme is designed, so that integrals for the most important terms in the potential will be exact. The procedure is tested on C(2)H(4). All 12 coordinates are treated explicitly. We need only ~1.52 × 10(8) quadrature points. A product Gauss grid with which one could calculate the same energy levels has at least 5.67 × 10(13) points.
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) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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".