MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2313168729 · doi:10.1021/jp404888d

CO Dimer: New Potential Energy Surface and Rovibrational Calculations

2013· article· en· W2313168729 on OpenAlexaff
Richard Dawes, Xiaogang Wang, Tucker Carrington

Bibliographic record

VenueThe Journal of Physical Chemistry A · 2013
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPhysics and Astronomy
TopicAdvanced Chemical Physics Studies
Canadian institutionsQueen's University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsRotational–vibrational spectroscopyDimerPotential energy surfaceSurface (topology)Energy (signal processing)ChemistryPhysicsAtomic physicsMoleculeGeometryMathematicsNuclear magnetic resonanceExcited stateQuantum mechanics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The spectrum of CO dimer was investigated by solving the rovibrational Schrödinger equation on a new potential energy surface constructed from coupled-cluster ab initio points. The Schrödinger equation was solved with a Lanczos algorithm. Several 4D (rigid monomer) global ab initio potential energy surfaces (PESs) were made using a previously reported interpolating moving least-squares (IMLS) fitting procedure specialized to describe the interaction of two linear fragments. The potential has two nonpolar minima giving rise to a complicated set of energy level stacks, which are very sensitive to the shapes and relative depths of the two wells. Although the CO dimer has defied previous attempts at an accurate purely ab initio description our best surface yields results in good agreement with experiment. Root-mean-square (rms) fitting errors of less than 0.1 cm(-1) were obtained for each of the fits using 2226 ab initio data at different levels. This allowed direct assessment of the quality of various levels of ab initio theory for prediction of spectra. Our tests indicate that standard CCSD(T) is slow to converge the interaction energy even when sextuple zeta bases as large as ACV6Z are used. The explicitly correlated CCSD(T)-F12b method was found to recover significantly more correlation energy (from singles and doubles) at the CBS limit. Correlation of the core-electrons was found to be important for this system. The best PES was obtained by extrapolation of calculations at the CCSD(T)(AE)-F12b/CVnZ-F12 (n = 3,4) levels. The calculated energy levels were compared to 105 J ≤ 10 levels from experiment. The rms error for 68 levels with J ≤ 6 is only 0.29 cm(-1). The calculated energy levels were assigned stack labels using several tools. New stacks were found. One of them, stack y1, has an energy lower than many previously known stacks and may be observable.

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 distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: Bench or experimental
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.269
Threshold uncertainty score0.321

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.006
GPT teacher head0.233
Teacher spread0.228 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designBench or experimental
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

Citations69
Published2013
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueThe Journal of Physical Chemistry ASame topicAdvanced Chemical Physics StudiesFrench-language works237,207