MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2051116660 · doi:10.1021/jp0482666

Atomic Charges Are Measurable Quantum Expectation Values:  A Rebuttal of Criticisms of QTAIM Charges

2004· article· en· W2051116660 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueThe Journal of Physical Chemistry A · 2004
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldChemistry
TopicVarious Chemistry Research Topics
Canadian institutionsMcMaster UniversityUniversity of Toronto
Fundersnot available
KeywordsObservableAtoms in moleculesPhysicsPolarizabilityAtomic physicsCharge (physics)Atomic chargeAtom (system on chip)Quantum mechanicsChemistryMolecule

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The charge on an atom in a molecule is defined by the quantum theory of atoms in molecules (QTAIM) as the expectation value of the number operator, a Dirac observable. An atomic charge is measurable and it, together with its change, contributes to numerous measurable properties: to all molecular moments, to molecular polarizability, to intensities of electronic, infrared, and Raman absorption intensities, and to the polarization of a dielectric. The properties resulting from an applied magnetic field parallel those induced by an electric field, with the induced atomic charge being replaced by the atomic current. The phenomena of polarization and magnetization, permanent or induced, have a common physical basis when described in terms of the physics of an open system, all expressions exhibiting a single underlying structure in terms of their atomic contributions. The paper points out that this physics and the appeal the experiment it affords are lost when one employs other definitions of an atomic charge.

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.

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)0.001
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 score0.006
Threshold uncertainty score0.777

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
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 head0.022
GPT teacher head0.282
Teacher spread0.260 · 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