MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2765706942 · doi:10.1063/1.5003825

Exact exchange-correlation potentials of singlet two-electron systems

2017· article· en· W2765706942 on OpenAlexafffund
Ilya G. Ryabinkin, Egor Ospadov, Viktor N. Staroverov

Bibliographic record

VenueThe Journal of Chemical Physics · 2017
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPhysics and Astronomy
TopicAdvanced Chemical Physics Studies
Canadian institutionsWestern UniversityThe Scarborough HospitalUniversity of Toronto
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of CanadaGovernment of Canada
KeywordsWave functionElectronic correlationBasis setGaussianBasis (linear algebra)Ground stateElectronSinglet stateSeries (stratigraphy)Ab initioBasis functionInversion (geology)Configuration interactionQuantum mechanicsStatistical physicsChemistryPhysicsMathematicsExcited stateMolecule

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

We suggest a non-iterative analytic method for constructing the exchange-correlation potential, vXC(r), of any singlet ground-state two-electron system. The method is based on a convenient formula for vXC(r) in terms of quantities determined only by the system’s electronic wave function, exact or approximate, and is essentially different from the Kohn–Sham inversion technique. When applied to Gaussian-basis-set wave functions, the method yields finite-basis-set approximations to the corresponding basis-set-limit vXC(r), whereas the Kohn–Sham inversion produces physically inappropriate (oscillatory and divergent) potentials. The effectiveness of the procedure is demonstrated by computing accurate exchange-correlation potentials of several two-electron systems (helium isoelectronic series, H2, H3+) using common ab initio methods and Gaussian basis sets.

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: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: Theoretical or conceptual
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.003
Threshold uncertainty score0.008

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.000

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 head0.277
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 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

Citations30
Published2017
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueThe Journal of Chemical PhysicsSame topicAdvanced Chemical Physics StudiesFrench-language works237,207