A density functional theory approach to the magnetic properties of a coupled single-molecule magnet (Mn<sub>7</sub>)<sub>2</sub> complex — An entangled qubit pair candidate
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The exchange coupling constants of a Mn14 complex constituted by two weakly coupled Mn7 moieties were calculated using two different density functional theory (DFT) approaches: the Perdew–Burke–Ernzerhof (PBE) functional with a numerical basis set and the hybrid Becke, three-parameter Lee–Yang–Parr (B3LYP) functional employed with a Gaussian basis set. The sign and relative strength of the exchange coupling constants calculated with both methods were consistent; as expected, the values calculated with the PBE functional were slightly overestimated, as corroborated by comparison with the experimental magnetic susceptibility curve. Both methods gave a ground spin configuration of S = 3/2 for the Mn7 moiety, which was weakly antiferromagnetically coupled with the other Mn7 fragment, leading to an S = 0 ground spin configuration for the entire Mn14 complex.
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 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 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 | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.004 | 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".