Dispersion interactions in density‐functional theory
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract Density‐functional theory (DFT) allows for the calculation of many chemical properties with relative ease, thus making it extremely useful for the physical organic chemistry community to understand and focus on various experiments. However, density‐functional techniques have their limitations, including the ability to satisfactorily describe dispersion interactions. Given the ubiquitous nature of dispersion in chemical and biological systems, this is not a trivial matter. Recent advances in the development of DFT methods can treat dispersion. These include dispersion‐corrected DFT (using explicit, attractive dispersion terms), parameterized functionals, and dispersion‐correcting potentials, all of which can dramatically improve performance for dispersion‐bound species. In this perspective, we highlight the achievements made in modeling dispersion using DFT. We hope that this will provide valuable insight to both computational chemists and experimentalists, who aim to study physical processes driven by dispersion interactions. Copyright © 2009 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.
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.
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it