MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2080203173 · doi:10.1103/physrevb.73.045111

First-principles calculations of hyperfine parameters with the all-electron mixed-basis method

2006· article· en· W2080203173 on OpenAlexaff
M. S. Bahramy, Marcel H. F. Sluiter, Yoshiyuki Kawazoe

Bibliographic record

VenuePhysical Review B · 2006
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPhysics and Astronomy
TopicAdvanced Chemical Physics Studies
Canadian institutionsHatch (Canada)
Fundersnot available
KeywordsHyperfine structureBasis (linear algebra)Representation (politics)Density functional theoryIsotropyContext (archaeology)PhysicsWave functionElectronBasis functionAnisotropyAtom (system on chip)Spin (aerodynamics)Atomic physicsStatistical physicsComputational physicsQuantum mechanicsComputer scienceMathematicsGeometryThermodynamics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Within density functional theory, an efficient and accurate method for calculating and analyzing hyperfine parameters has been developed. The so-called mixed-basis method expands the one-electron wave functions in terms of both localized nucleus-centered functions and plane waves and thereby affords an accurate representation for the spin density both in the immediate vicinity of the nucleus and in the bonding regions. The current method is compared with experiment and the best computational methods reported in the literature. The mixed-basis approach is shown to yield highly accurate isotropic and anisotropic hyperfine parameters with modest computational effort. The atom-centered radial representation of the potentials and spin densities allows us to analyze, within the context of density functional theory, the effect of the exchange interaction on the individual core levels in a physically transparent way.

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: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: Theoretical or conceptual
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.338
Threshold uncertainty score0.477

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 head0.021
GPT teacher head0.311
Teacher spread0.290 · 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 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

Citations30
Published2006
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuePhysical Review BSame topicAdvanced Chemical Physics StudiesFrench-language works237,207