MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2461093577 · doi:10.1021/acs.jctc.6b00456

Minimal Basis Iterative Stockholder: Atoms in Molecules for Force-Field Development

2016· article· en· W2461093577 on OpenAlexafffund
Toon Verstraelen, Steven Vandenbrande, Farnaz Heidar‐Zadeh, Louis Vanduyfhuys, Véronique Van Speybroeck, Michel Waroquier, Paul W. Ayers

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Chemical Theory and Computation · 2016
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPhysics and Astronomy
TopicAdvanced Chemical Physics Studies
Canadian institutionsMcMaster University
FundersEuropean Research CouncilNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of CanadaEuropean CommissionVlaamse regeringUniversiteit GentFonds Wetenschappelijk OnderzoekBelgian Federal Science Policy Office
KeywordsBasis (linear algebra)Linear scaleDensity functional theoryCoulombElectronic structureField (mathematics)Force field (fiction)Computer scienceDivergence (linguistics)Electronic densityStatistical physicsPhysicsElectronQuantum mechanicsMathematicsGeometry

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Atomic partial charges appear in the Coulomb term of many force-field models and can be derived from electronic structure calculations with a myriad of atoms-in-molecules (AIM) methods. More advanced models have also been proposed, using the distributed nature of the electron cloud and atomic multipoles. In this work, an electrostatic force field is defined through a concise approximation of the electron density, for which the Coulomb interaction is trivially evaluated. This approximate "pro-density" is expanded in a minimal basis of atom-centered s-type Slater density functions, whose parameters are optimized by minimizing the Kullback-Leibler divergence of the pro-density from a reference electron density, e.g., obtained from an electronic structure calculation. The proposed method, Minimal Basis Iterative Stockholder (MBIS), is a variant of the Hirshfeld AIM method, but it can also be used as a density-fitting technique. An iterative algorithm to refine the pro-density is easily implemented with a linear-scaling computational cost, enabling applications to supramolecular systems. The benefits of the MBIS method are demonstrated with systematic applications to molecular databases and extended models of condensed phases. A comparison to 14 other AIM methods shows its effectiveness when modeling electrostatic interactions. MBIS is also suitable for rescaling atomic polarizabilities in the Tkatchenko-Scheffler scheme for dispersion interactions.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.009
Threshold uncertainty score0.029

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0020.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0090.002

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 head0.010
GPT teacher head0.271
Teacher spread0.261 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designSimulation or modeling
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

Citations256
Published2016
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

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