Using perturbatively selected configuration interaction in quantum Monte Carlo calculations
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Defining accurate and compact trial wavefunctions leading to small statistical and fixed-node errors in quantum Monte Carlo (QMC) calculations is still a challenging problem. Here we propose to make use of selected configuration interaction (CI) expansions obtained by selecting the most important determinants through a perturbative criterion. A major advantage with respect to truncated CASSCF wavefunctions or CI expansions limited to a maximum number of excitations (e.g, CISD) is that much smaller expansions can be considered (many unessential determinants are avoided), an important practical point for efficient QMC calculations. The most important determinants entering first during the selection process (hierarchical construction) the main features of the nodal structure of the wavefunction can be expected to be obtained with a moderate number of determinants. Thanks to this property, the delicate problem of optimizing in a Monte Carlo framework the numerous linear and (or) nonlinear parameters of the determinantal part of the trial wavefunction could be avoided. As a first numerical example, the calculation of the ground-state energy of the oxygen atom is presented. The best DMC value reported so far is obtained.
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 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| 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) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
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".