MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2059466640 · doi:10.1002/qua.24832

Orbital entanglement in quantum chemistry

2014· article· en· W2059466640 on OpenAlexafffund
Katharina Bogusławski, Paweł Tecmer

Bibliographic record

VenueInternational Journal of Quantum Chemistry · 2014
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicQuantum Information and Cryptography
Canadian institutionsMcMaster University
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of CanadaSchweizerischer Nationalfonds zur Förderung der Wissenschaftlichen Forschung
KeywordsWave functionQuantum entanglementChemistryQuantum mechanicsElectronic structureElectronic correlationQuantum chemistryChemical bondSpin (aerodynamics)QuantumComputational chemistryElectronPhysicsMoleculeThermodynamics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The basic concepts of orbital entanglement and its application to chemistry are briefly reviewed. The calculation of orbital entanglement measures from correlated wavefunctions is discussed in terms of reduced n ‐particle density matrices. Possible simplifications in their evaluation are highlighted in case of seniority‐zero wavefunctions. Specifically, orbital entanglement allows us to dissect electron correlation effects in its strong and weak contributions, to determine bond orders, to assess the quality and stability of active space calculations, to monitor chemical reactions, and to identify points along the reaction coordinate where electronic wavefunctions change drastically. Thus, orbital entanglement represents a useful and intuitive tool to interpret complex electronic wavefunctions and to facilitate a qualitative understanding of electronic structure and how it changes in chemical processes. © 2014 Wiley Periodicals, Inc.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
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: Theoretical or conceptual
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.004
Threshold uncertainty score0.012

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0020.002
Science and technology studies0.0010.003
Scholarly communication0.0020.003
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0040.001

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.

Opus teacher head0.008
GPT teacher head0.245
Teacher spread0.237 · 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

Citations113
Published2014
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueInternational Journal of Quantum ChemistrySame topicQuantum Information and CryptographyFrench-language works237,207