MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2162748153 · doi:10.1063/1.4920947

Density-functional errors in ionization potential with increasing system size

2015· article· en· W2162748153 on OpenAlexaff
Sarah R. Whittleton, Xochitl A. Sosa Vazquez, Christine M. Isborn, Erin R. Johnson

Bibliographic record

VenueThe Journal of Chemical Physics · 2015
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPhysics and Astronomy
TopicAdvanced Chemical Physics Studies
Canadian institutionsDalhousie University
FundersAmerican Chemical Society Petroleum Research Fund
KeywordsIonizationDelocalized electronDensity functional theoryRange (aeronautics)Work (physics)Series (stratigraphy)Charge (physics)ComputationIonization energyAtomic physicsStatistical physicsComputational physicsChemistryPhysicsMaterials scienceComputational chemistryMathematicsAlgorithmQuantum mechanicsIon

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This work investigates the effects of molecular size on the accuracy of density-functional ionization potentials for a set of 28 hydrocarbons, including series of alkanes, alkenes, and oligoacenes. As the system size increases, delocalization error introduces a systematic underestimation of the ionization potential, which is rationalized by considering the fractional-charge behavior of the electronic energies. The computation of the ionization potential with many density-functional approximations is not size-extensive due to excessive delocalization of the incipient positive charge. While inclusion of exact exchange reduces the observed errors, system-specific tuning of long-range corrected functionals does not generally improve accuracy. These results emphasize that good performance of a functional for small molecules is not necessarily transferable to larger systems.

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)0.005
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.014
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: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.005
Threshold uncertainty score0.025

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0050.014
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.002
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.011
GPT teacher head0.219
Teacher spread0.207 · 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

Citations61
Published2015
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

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