MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2059502386 · doi:10.1063/1.1839857

Efficient silicon surface and cluster modeling using quantum capping potentials

2005· article· en· W2059502386 on OpenAlexaff
Gino A. DiLabio, Robert A. Wolkow, Erin R. Johnson

Bibliographic record

VenueThe Journal of Chemical Physics · 2005
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPhysics and Astronomy
TopicAdvanced Chemical Physics Studies
Canadian institutionsNational Institute for Nanotechnology
Fundersnot available
KeywordsDangling bondSiliconCluster (spacecraft)QuantumAtom (system on chip)ChemistryIonization energyMolecular orbitalChemical physicsAtomic physicsMolecular physicsNanotechnologyIonizationMaterials scienceMoleculePhysicsQuantum mechanicsIon

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

A one-electron, silicon quantum capping potential for use in capping the dangling bonds formed by artificially limiting silicon clusters or surfaces is developed. The quantum capping potentials are general and can be used directly in any computational package that can handle effective core potentials. For silicon clusters and silicon surface models, we compared the results of traditional hydrogen atom capping with those obtained from capping with quantum capping potentials. The results clearly show that cluster and surface models capped with quantum capping potentials have ionization potentials, electron affinities, and highest occupied molecular orbital-lowest unoccupied molecular orbital gaps that are in very good agreement with those of larger systems. The silicon quantum capping potentials should be applied in cases where one wishes to model processes involving charges or low-energy excitations in silicon clusters and surfaces consisting of more than ca. 150 atoms.

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 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)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.115
Threshold uncertainty score0.514

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
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 head0.023
GPT teacher head0.272
Teacher spread0.249 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

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

Citations42
Published2005
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueThe Journal of Chemical PhysicsSame topicAdvanced Chemical Physics StudiesFrench-language works237,207