Bibliographic record
Abstract
Sensitivity of thermodynamics to the Barker–Henderson (BH) diameter for the Lennard-Jones (LJ) potential is discussed, which covers both its approximation in calculation and improvement in rationality. With regarding to the approximation, pressure and internal energy for the LJ fluid, LJ chains and LJ chain mixtures are investigated. It is found that internal energy is much more sensitive to an approximation to the diameter than pressure for pure fluids, and both pressure and internal energy are very sensitive to the diameter for mixtures. It is also found that the approximating expression given by Cotterman et al. (1986) covers the widest range of temperatures. The rationality of the BH diameter itself at very high temperatures and densities is also analyzed. Through a functional expansion of Helmholtz free energy, we conclude that a density-dependent BH diameter is fundamentally more appropriate. The proposed diameter yields almost the same results as the original BH diameter at normal conditions and remedies its deficiencies at extreme ones. The density-dependent diameter provides a convenient way to study the LJ systems undergoing gas-solid phase transition or freezing.
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 | 0.003 | 0.015 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.005 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| 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".