MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2083157113 · doi:10.1063/1.1599335

The general-model-space state-universal coupled-cluster method exemplified by the LiH molecule

2003· article· en· W2083157113 on OpenAlexafffund
Xiangzhu Li, Josef Paldus

Bibliographic record

VenueThe Journal of Chemical Physics · 2003
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPhysics and Astronomy
TopicAdvanced Chemical Physics Studies
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Waterloo
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada
KeywordsAnsatzCoupled clusterExcited statePotential energyWave functionSpace (punctuation)PhysicsState (computer science)Open shellCluster (spacecraft)ChemistryAtomic physicsComputational chemistryQuantum mechanicsMoleculeMathematicsComputer scienceAlgorithm

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The salient features of the recently introduced general-model-space (GMS) state-universal (SU) coupled-cluster (CC) method are illustrated on the case of the LiH molecule. Describing the breaking of the Li–H bond by relying on an open-shell-type GMS reveals the importance of the connectivity conditions (C conditions), which represent a crucial new ingredient of the GMS SU CC theory. Only when we properly account for these C conditions can we uniquely represent the full configuration interaction (FCI) wave functions in terms of the multireference SU exponential cluster ansatz and recover the FCI energies via the GMS SU CC method, assuming that all the relevant clusters at a given level of the theory are considered. Drawing on various GMSs, we compute the potential energy curves for three Σ+1, two Σ+3, three Π,1 and three Π3 states, using the GMS SU CC method truncated at the singly- and doubly-excited level (GMS SU CCSD), as well as the externally corrected (N,M)-CCSD method that exploits the NR-CISD wave functions as the external source of higher-than-pair clusters in the MR SU CCSD method. In all cases we obtain excellent results: For Σ+ states, the maximum difference between the FCI and various SU CCSD energies is about 0.5 millihartree. These errors are further reduced when we employ the (N,M)-CCSD methods. For the Π states, the deviations of the SU CCSD energies relative to FCI amount to at most a few hundreds of a millihartree. We also report on the size-extensivity tests and the exactness of the formalism for two-electron systems.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation 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: none
Teacher disagreement score0.012
Threshold uncertainty score0.024

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0020.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.000

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 head0.011
GPT teacher head0.271
Teacher spread0.261 · 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 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

Citations89
Published2003
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

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