MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2088464238 · doi:10.1063/1.3678593

Identifying and evaluating organic nonlinear optical materials via molecular moments

2012· article· en· W2088464238 on OpenAlexaff
Andrew Higginbotham, Jacqueline M. Cole, Martin A. Blood-Forsythe, Daniel D. Hickstein

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Applied Physics · 2012
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMaterials Science
TopicNonlinear Optical Materials Research
Canadian institutionsUniversity of New Brunswick
Fundersnot available
KeywordsHyperpolarizabilityTensor (intrinsic definition)Charge (physics)Charge densityNonlinear opticsNonlinear opticalNonlinear systemMolecular physicsMoleculeComputational chemistryAb initio quantum chemistry methodsOrganic moleculesStatistical physicsDensity functional theoryMaterials scienceChemistryComputational physicsChemical physicsPhysicsQuantum mechanicsMathematics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

We demonstrate how to appropriately estimate the zero-frequency (static) hyperpolarizability of an organic molecule from its charge distribution, and we explore applications of these estimates for identifying and evaluating new organic nonlinear optical (NLO) materials. First, we calculate hyperpolarizabilities from Hartree-Fock–derived charge distributions and find order-of-magnitude agreement with experimental values. We show that these simple arithmetic calculations will enable systematic searches for new organic NLO molecules. Second, we derive hyperpolarizabilities from crystallographic data using a multipolar charge-density analysis and find good agreement with empirical calculations. This demonstrates an experimental determination of the full static hyperpolarizability tensor in a solid-state sample.

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: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: Bench or experimental
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.001
Threshold uncertainty score0.003

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.042
GPT teacher head0.350
Teacher spread0.308 · 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 designBench or experimental
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

Citations14
Published2012
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Applied PhysicsSame topicNonlinear Optical Materials ResearchFrench-language works237,207