MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2332152992 · doi:10.1021/jp410199j

Evaluation of the Constant Wavenumber Cutoff Parameter for Modeling van der Waals Energy

2014· article· en· W2332152992 on OpenAlexafffund
Nadia Shardt, Subir Bhattacharjee, Janet A.W. Elliott

Bibliographic record

VenueThe Journal of Physical Chemistry C · 2014
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPhysics and Astronomy
TopicExperimental and Theoretical Physics Studies
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Alberta
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of CanadaCanada Research Chairs
KeywordsWavenumberCutoffConstant (computer programming)van der Waals forcePhysicsFunction (biology)ThermodynamicsOpticsQuantum mechanics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

We examine the assumption that the wavenumber cutoff is constant for two parallel plates separated by a third material independent of which of the substances are interacting or forming the intervening medium. We take experimental values of interfacial tension from the literature to calculate wavenumber cutoffs for system configurations of decane, water, and air, and we find that these wavenumber cutoffs are not constant. The interaction energy of each system is plotted as a function of separation distance to compare the divergent Lifshitz, the constant wavenumber, and the system-specific wavenumber models.

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)0.001
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: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.359
Threshold uncertainty score0.211

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
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 head0.019
GPT teacher head0.283
Teacher spread0.264 · 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

Citations1
Published2014
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueThe Journal of Physical Chemistry CSame topicExperimental and Theoretical Physics StudiesFrench-language works237,207