Contracted basis Lanczos methods for computing numerically exact rovibrational levels of methane
Bibliographic record
Abstract
We present a numerically exact calculation of rovibrational levels of a five-atom molecule. Two contracted basis Lanczos strategies are proposed. The first and preferred strategy is a two-stage contraction. Products of eigenfunctions of a four-dimensional (4D) stretch problem and eigenfunctions of 5D bend-rotation problems, one for each K, are used as basis functions for computing eigenfunctions and eigenvalues (for each K) of the Hamiltonian without the Coriolis coupling term, denoted H0. Finally, energy levels of the full Hamiltonian are calculated in a basis of the eigenfunctions of H0. The second strategy is a one-stage contraction in which energy levels of the full Hamiltonian are computed in the product contracted basis (without first computing eigenfunctions of H0). The two-stage contraction strategy, albeit more complicated, has the crucial advantage that it is trivial to parallelize the calculation so that the CPU and memory costs are independent of J. For the one-stage contraction strategy the CPU and memory costs of the difficult part of the calculation scale linearly with J. We use the polar coordinates associated with orthogonal Radau vectors and spherical harmonic type rovibrational basis functions. A parity-adapted rovibrational basis suitable for a five-atom molecule is proposed and employed to obtain bend-rotation eigenfunctions in the first step of both contraction methods. The effectiveness of the two methods is demonstrated by calculating a large number of converged J = 1 rovibrational levels of methane using a global potential energy surface.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.005 | 0.001 |
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 itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".