Orbital invariance issue in multireference methods
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.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract The orbital invariance problem is analyzed from the tensor theory point of view, with an emphasis on multireference coupled cluster methods. Using the transformation properties of second‐quantized operators, we discuss the orbital invariance properties of various methods by examining the tensor properties of the residual equations. A simple self‐consistency‐checking algorithm is proposed. We first establish the orbital invariance properties for the Hartree–Fock, single reference configuration interaction, single reference coupled cluster, complete‐active‐space self‐consistent‐field, and multireference configuration interaction methods, and then discuss the invariance properties of the complete‐active‐space coupled cluster and CCSDt methods. Finally, we demonstrate theoretically the lack of orbital invariance for Jeziorski–Monkhorst ansatz based methods. It appears necessary to modify the ansatz to achieve orbital invariance, and internal contraction serves as one possible solution. © 2009 Wiley Periodicals, Inc. Int J Quantum Chem, 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.
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it