MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2095459160 · doi:10.1063/1.1431271

Two functions of the density matrix and their relation to the chemical bond

2002· article· en· W2095459160 on OpenAlexafffund
Hartmut Schmider, Axel D. Becke

Bibliographic record

VenueThe Journal of Chemical Physics · 2002
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPhysics and Astronomy
TopicAdvanced Chemical Physics Studies
Canadian institutionsQueen's University
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada
KeywordsChemical bondCovalent bondAtomic orbitalDensity matrixPhysicsWave functionDiagonalPosition and momentum spaceQuantum mechanicsMeasure (data warehouse)Electron densityMatrix (chemical analysis)ElectronChemistryMathematicsGeometry

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

We examine and compare two previously introduced functions of the one-particle density matrix that are suitable to represent its off-diagonal structure in a condensed form and that have illustrative connections to the nature of the chemical bond. One of them, the Localized-Orbital Locator (LOL) [J. Molec. Struct. (THEOCHEM) 527, 51 (2000)], is based only on the noninteracting kinetic-energy density τ and the charge density ρ at a point, and gives an intuitive measure of the relative speed of electrons in its vicinity. Alternatively, LOL focuses on regions that are dominated by single localized orbitals. The other one, the Parity Function P [J. Chem. Phys. 105, 11134 (1996)], is a section through the Wigner phase-space function at zero momentum, and contains information about the phase of the interference of atomiclike orbital contributions from bound centers. In this paper, we discuss the way in which these functions condense information in the density matrix, and illustrate on a variety of examples of unusual chemical bonds how they can help to understand the nature of “covalence.”

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.005
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation 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: none
Teacher disagreement score0.004
Threshold uncertainty score0.012

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.005
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0020.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.003
Scholarly communication0.0020.002
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0040.001

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.

Opus teacher head0.013
GPT teacher head0.238
Teacher spread0.225 · 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 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

Citations131
Published2002
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

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