MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2785203492 · doi:10.1139/cjc-2017-0651

MP2 or B3LYP: computed bond distances compared with CCSD(T)/cc-pVQZ

2018· article· en· W2785203492 on OpenAlexaffvenue
Delano P. Chong

Bibliographic record

VenueCanadian Journal of Chemistry · 2018
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicComputational Drug Discovery Methods
Canadian institutionsUniversity of British Columbia
Fundersnot available
KeywordsChemistryBasis setBond lengthBasis (linear algebra)Density functional theoryComputational chemistryAtomic physicsMoleculePhysicsMathematics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The equilibrium bond lengths of 41 small molecules are calculated by Gaussian09 and ADF2013 programs. We use five different basis sets: 6-31G*, cc-pVDZ, 6-311G+(2d,p), cc-pVTZ, and cc-pVQZ, for six different methods: Hartree-Fock, MP2, MP3, CCSD, CCSD(T), and B3LYP. The reliability of each level of theory on 89 bond lengths compared with CCSD(T)/cc-pVQZ is examined in terms of the mean absolute deviation. In particular, basis set dependence of the relative reliability of the two popular methods MP2 versus B3LYP is important to computational chemists. In addition, the efficient even-tempered basis set of Slater-type orbital called et-pVQZ, available in the ADF2013 program, is tested with the popular density functional B3LYP.

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: Not applicable · Consensus signal: Not applicable
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.390
Threshold uncertainty score0.651

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.000
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 head0.020
GPT teacher head0.265
Teacher spread0.244 · 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 designNot applicable
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

Citations15
Published2018
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCanadian Journal of ChemistrySame topicComputational Drug Discovery MethodsFrench-language works237,207