Model core potentials for studies of scalar-relativistic effects and spin-orbit coupling at Douglas–Kroll level. I. Theory and applications to Pb and Bi
Bibliographic record
Abstract
A theory of model core potentials that can treat spin-orbit-coupling (SOC) effects at the level of Douglas-Kroll formalism has been developed. By storing the damping effect of kinematic operator in the Douglas-Kroll spin-orbit operator into an additional set of basis set contraction coefficients, the Breit-Pauli spin-orbit code in the GAMESS-US program was successfully used to perform Douglas-Kroll spin-orbit calculations. It was found that minute errors in the radial functions of valence orbitals lead to large errors in the spin-orbit energy levels and thus fitting the radial part of the spin-orbit matrix elements is necessary in model core potential parametrization. The first model core potentials that include the new formalism were developed for two 6p-block elements, Pb and Bi. The valence space of the 5p, 5d, 6s, and 6p orbitals was used because of the large SOC between the 5p and 6p orbitals. The model core potentials were validated in the calculations of atomic properties as well as spectroscopic constants of diatomic metal hydrides. The agreement between results of the model core potential and all-electron calculations was excellent, with energy errors of hundreds of cm(-1) and hundredths of eV, r(e) errors of thousandths of A, and omega(e) errors under 20 cm(-1). Two kinds of interplay between SOC effect and bonding process (antibonding and bonding SOC) were demonstrated using spin-free term potential curves of PbH and BiH. The present study is the first extension of the model core potential method beyond Breit-Pauli to Douglas-Kroll SOC calculations.
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 | 0.001 |
| 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 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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".