Impurity hamiltonian for transition metal complexes based on the exact exchange for correlated electrons hybrid functional
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract We present a theoretical method that combines density functional theory (DFT) and full configuration interaction (CI). Such a combination is based on the impurity model to (i) incorporate the advantages of DFT in description of the dynamic correlation and (ii) reduce the number of the two‐electron integrals. The impurity model has been introduced with the help of a special type of the hybrid functional, namely, the exact exchange for correlated electrons (EECE), and the orthogonal fragment orbitals formalism. The EECE functional, originally based on the formulation of the local density approximation + U (LDA + U) method without the empirical parameter U, has been rewritten in this work in a form that incorporates the projected electron–electron repulsion energy operator. This representation has been compared with other types of nonglobal hybrids: position dependent and range separated hybrids. Further, the obtained Hamiltonian of the generalized Anderson model has been transformed to the form that affords the implementation of the linear scaling density‐matrix renormalization group algorithm. © 2011 Wiley Periodicals, Inc.
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 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 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 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".