<mml:math xmlns:mml="http://www.w3.org/1998/Math/MathML" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msup><mml:mi>G</mml:mi><mml:mn>0</mml:mn></mml:msup><mml:msup><mml:mi>W</mml:mi><mml:mn>0</mml:mn></mml:msup></mml:mrow></mml:math>band gap of ZnO: Effects of plasmon-pole models
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Carefully converged calculations are performed for the band gap of ZnO within many-body perturbation theory (${G}^{0}{W}^{0}$ approximation). The results obtained using four different well-established plasmon-pole models are compared with those of explicit calculations without such models (the contour-deformation approach). This comparison shows that, surprisingly, plasmon-pole models depending on the $f$-sum rule gives less precise results. In particular, it confirms that the band gap of ZnO is underestimated in the ${G}^{0}{W}^{0}$ approach as compared to experiment, contrary to the recent claim of Shih et al. [Phys. Rev. Lett. 105, 146401 (2010)].
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 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.004 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.566 | 0.282 |
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".