MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2163654497 · doi:10.1139/v10-116

Theoretical study of the microwave spectrum of isotopologues of OCS–(He)<sub>2</sub>

2010· article· en· W2163654497 on OpenAlexafffundvenue
Hui Li, Yongdong Liu, Wolfgang Jäger, Robert J. Le Roy, Pierre–Nicholas Roy

Bibliographic record

VenueCanadian Journal of Chemistry · 2010
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPhysics and Astronomy
TopicQuantum, superfluid, helium dynamics
Canadian institutionsUniversity of AlbertaUniversity of Waterloo
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada
KeywordsIsotopologueRotational–vibrational spectroscopyChemistryMicrowaveAtomic physicsRotational spectrumSpectral lineHeliumDensity functional theoryComputational chemistryQuantum mechanicsRotational spectroscopyPhysicsMolecule

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The rovibrational energy levels (J = 0–3) and rotational spectra of seven isotopologues of the OCS–(He)2 complex have been determined by numerically exact basis set calculations. The interaction energy is represented as a sum of two-body terms consisting of the OCS–He potential, which Howson and Hutson (J. Chem. Phys. 2001, 115, 5059) obtained at the CCSD(T)/aug-cc-pVTZ level of theory, and the He–He potential that Jeziorska et al. (J. Chem. Phys. 2007, 127,124303) obtained with SAPT theory. Three-body effects and the quality of the potential are discussed. Comparison with experiment shows that microwave transitions can be predicted by this additive approach with an accuracy equal or better than 0.7% for all the observed spectral lines. A method for the three-dimensional representation of the helium density in the body-fixed frame is presented that highlights the highly delocalized nature of the helium subsystem.

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)0.001
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: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.005
Threshold uncertainty score0.018

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0050.000

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 head0.003
GPT teacher head0.190
Teacher spread0.187 · 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

Citations5
Published2010
Admission routes3
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCanadian Journal of ChemistrySame topicQuantum, superfluid, helium dynamicsFrench-language works237,207