MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2037279818 · doi:10.1063/1.1358865

Assessment of the quality of orbital energies in resolution-of-the-identity Hartree–Fock calculations using deMon auxiliary basis sets

2001· article· en· W2037279818 on OpenAlexaff
Sébastien Hamel, Mark E. Casida, Dennis R. Salahub

Bibliographic record

VenueThe Journal of Chemical Physics · 2001
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPhysics and Astronomy
TopicAdvanced Chemical Physics Studies
Canadian institutionsSteacie Institute for Molecular SciencesUniversité de MontréalCompute Canada
FundersMinisterio de Economía y Competitividad
KeywordsAtomic physicsMolecular orbitalChemistryAtomic orbitalHartree–Fock methodPhysicsExcited stateIonizationExcitationSlater-type orbitalOrbital overlapElectronMoleculeQuantum mechanicsMolecular orbital theoryIon

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The Roothaan–Hartree–Fock (HF) method has been implemented in deMon–DynaRho within the resolution-of-the-identity (RI) auxiliary-function approximation. While previous studies have focused primarily upon the effect of the RI approximation on total energies, very little information has been available regarding the effect of the RI approximation on orbital energies, even though orbital energies play a central role in many theories of ionization and excitation. We fill this gap by testing the accuracy of the RI approximation against non-RI-HF calculations using the same basis sets, for the occupied orbital energies and an equal number of unoccupied orbital energies of five small molecules, namely CO, N2, CH2O, C2H4, and pyridine (in total 102 orbitals). These molecules have well-characterized excited states and so are commonly used to test and validate molecular excitation spectra computations. Of the deMon auxiliary basis sets tested, the best results are obtained with the (44) auxiliary basis sets, yielding orbital energies to within 0.05 eV, which is adequate for analyzing typical low resolution polyatomic molecule ionization and excitation spectra. Interestingly, we find that the error in orbital energies due to the RI approximation does not seem to increase with the number of electrons. The absolute RI error in the orbital energies is also roughly related to their absolute magnitude, being larger for the core orbitals where the magnitude of orbital energy is large and smallest where the molecular orbital energy is smallest. Two further approximations were also considered, namely uniterated (“zero-order”) and single-iteration (“first-order”) calculations of orbital energies beginning with a local density approximation initial guess. We find that zero- and first-order orbital energies are very similar for occupied but not for unoccupied orbitals, and that the first-order orbital energies are fairly close to the corresponding fully converged values. Typical root mean square errors for first-order calculations of orbital energies are about 0.5 eV for occupied and 0.05 eV for unoccupied orbitals. Also reported are a few tests of the effect of the RI approximation on total energies using deMon basis sets, although this was not the primary objective of the present work.

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: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.247
Threshold uncertainty score0.337

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
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 head0.039
GPT teacher head0.353
Teacher spread0.314 · 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

Citations46
Published2001
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueThe Journal of Chemical PhysicsSame topicAdvanced Chemical Physics StudiesFrench-language works237,207