MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2046176366 · doi:10.1063/1.1615237

Theoretical study of the structure of lithium clusters

2003· article· en· W2046176366 on OpenAlexafffund
René Fournier, Joey Bo Yi Cheng, Anna Wong

Bibliographic record

VenueThe Journal of Chemical Physics · 2003
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldChemistry
TopicInorganic Chemistry and Materials
Canadian institutionsYork University
FundersCenter for Substance Abuse PreventionNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada
KeywordsJelliumCluster (spacecraft)Lithium (medication)Pentagonal bipyramidal molecular geometrySpin (aerodynamics)ChemistryAtomic physicsDensity functional theoryMolecular physicsPhysicsElectronCrystallographyComputational chemistryCrystal structureQuantum mechanicsThermodynamics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Lithium clusters Lin (n=5 to 20) were studied by Kohn–Sham theory with local spin density and gradient-corrected energy functionals. We used a Tabu Search algorithm for structure optimization. The lowest energy Lin isomers that we found fall in two categories: (i) the pentagonal bipyramid, icosahedron, and related structures which are typical of most pair potentials, and (ii) structures containing centered square antiprisms which are reminiscent of the bulk bcc structure and have two characteristic peaks in the pair distribution function, one near 2.60 Å and the other near 3.05 Å. Calculated isomer energies and vibrational frequencies suggest that, at room temperature, many cluster sizes should show liquidlike behavior or coexistence of multiple isomers. The number of unpaired electrons “M” as a function of cluster size “n” generally alternates between 0 (singlet) and 1 (doublet), but some cluster sizes display anomalous spin magnetic moments M(n); they are M(13)=5, M(16)=2, M(17)=3, and M(18)=2. The Li7, Li8, Li19, and Li20 clusters are particularly stable: they each have a very compact structure and a shape consistent with the ellipsoidal jellium model.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.008
Threshold uncertainty score0.016

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0040.000

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 head0.006
GPT teacher head0.219
Teacher spread0.213 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designTheoretical or conceptual
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

Citations100
Published2003
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueThe Journal of Chemical PhysicsSame topicInorganic Chemistry and MaterialsFrench-language works237,207