MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2326205136 · doi:10.1021/jp309651r

Ab Initio Potential Energy and Dipole Moment Surfaces for CS<sub>2</sub>: Determination of Molecular Vibrational Energies

2012· article· en· W2326205136 on OpenAlexaff
Ekadashi Pradhan, José‐Luis Carreón‐Macedo, Javier Eduardo Cuervo, Markus Schröder, Alex Brown

Bibliographic record

VenueThe Journal of Physical Chemistry A · 2012
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPhysics and Astronomy
TopicAdvanced Chemical Physics Studies
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Alberta
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPotential energy surfaceDipolePotential energyAb initioChemistryMoment (physics)IsotopomersEnergy (signal processing)Atomic physicsMolecular physicsPhysicsQuantum mechanicsMolecule

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The ground state potential energy and dipole moment surfaces for CS2 have been determined at the CASPT2/C:cc-pVTZ,S:aug-cc-pV(T+d)Z level of theory. The potential energy surface has been fit to a sum-of-products form using the neural network method with exponential neurons. A generic interface between neural network potential energy surface fitting and the Heidelberg MCTDH software package is demonstrated. The potential energy surface has also been fit using the potfit procedure in MCTDH. For fits to the low-energy regions of the potential, the neural network method requires fewer parameters than potfit to achieve high accuracy; global fits are comparable between the two methods. Using these potential energy surfaces, the vibrational energies have been computed for the four most abundant CS2 isotopomers. These results are compared to experimental and previous theoretical data. The current potential energy surfaces are shown to accurately reproduce the low-lying vibrational energies within a few wavenumbers. Hence, the potential energy and dipole moments surfaces will be useful for future study on the control of quantum dynamics in CS2.

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 score0.084
Threshold uncertainty score0.373

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 head0.228
Teacher spread0.223 · 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

Citations24
Published2012
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

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