MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2330769827 · doi:10.1021/ct300372x

Accurate Theoretical Description of the <sup>1</sup>L<sub>a</sub> and <sup>1</sup>L<sub>b</sub> Excited States in Acenes Using the All Order Constricted Variational Density Functional Theory Method and the Local Density Approximation

2012· article· en· W2330769827 on OpenAlexafffund
Mykhaylo Krykunov, Stefan Grimme, Tom Ziegler

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Chemical Theory and Computation · 2012
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPhysics and Astronomy
TopicAdvanced Chemical Physics Studies
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Calgary
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada
KeywordsTime-dependent density functional theoryDensity functional theoryExcited stateExcitationPhysicsAtomic physicsMolecular physicsQuantum mechanics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

We present the results of calculations on the vertical singlet (1)La and (1)Lb excitation energies in acenes within time dependent density functional theory (TDDFT), second order constricted variational DFT (CV(2)-DFT), and all order constricted variational DFT (CV(∞)-DFT) using the local density approximation LDA(VWN). For the linear acenes it is shown that the application of the Tamm-Dancoff (TD) approximation to TDDFT (TDDFT-TD) substantially improves the agreement with experiment compared to pure TDDFT. This improvement leads to the correct ordering of the (1)La and (1)Lb excitation energies in naphthalene. As TDDFT-TD is equivalent to the second order CV(2)-TD method one might hope for further improvements by going to all orders in CV(∞)-TD. Indeed, for linear acenes the application of the CV(∞)-TD method brings the agreement with experiment to within 0.1 eV for both types of excitations using the simple LDA functional. The CV(∞)-TD method based on LDA is also shown to be accurate for 15 nonlinear acenes with root-mean-square deviations of 0.24 eV for (1)La and 0.17 eV for (1)Lb.

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)0.002
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: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: Theoretical or conceptual
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.458
Threshold uncertainty score0.614

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
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 head0.016
GPT teacher head0.253
Teacher spread0.238 · 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 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

Citations42
Published2012
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Chemical Theory and ComputationSame topicAdvanced Chemical Physics StudiesFrench-language works237,207