MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Gaussian Process Model for Collision Dynamics of Complex Molecules

2015· article· en· W2135556320 on OpenAlexafffund
Jie Cui, Roman V. Krems

Bibliographic record

VenuePhysical Review Letters · 2015
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldChemistry
TopicSpectroscopy and Laser Applications
Canadian institutionsUniversity of British Columbia
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada
KeywordsObservableHypersurfaceCollisionScatteringPhysicsQuantumGaussianStatistical physicsQuantum dynamicsPotential energy surfaceQuantum mechanicsMoleculeComputer science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

We show that a Gaussian process model can be combined with a small number (of order 100) of scattering calculations to provide a multidimensional dependence of scattering observables on the experimentally controllable parameters (such as the collision energy or temperature) as well as the potential energy surface (PES) parameters. For the case of Ar-C_{6}H_{6} collisions, we show that 200 classical trajectory calculations are sufficient to provide a ten-dimensional hypersurface, giving the dependence of the collision lifetimes on the collision energy, internal temperature, and eight PES parameters. This can be used for solving the inverse scattering problem, for the efficient calculation of thermally averaged observables, for reducing the error of the molecular dynamics calculations by averaging over the PES variations, and for the analysis of the sensitivity of the observables to individual parameters determining the PES. Trained by a combination of classical and quantum calculations, the model provides an accurate description of the quantum scattering cross sections, even near scattering resonances.

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)0.002
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.009
Threshold uncertainty score0.018

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.002
Scholarly communication0.0010.002
Open science0.0030.001
Research integrity0.0020.002
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 head0.043
GPT teacher head0.357
Teacher spread0.314 · 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 designSimulation or modeling
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

Citations63
Published2015
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuePhysical Review LettersSame topicSpectroscopy and Laser ApplicationsFrench-language works237,207