Equivalence between the Classical and Quantum IR Spectral Density Approaches of Weak H-Bonds in the Absence of Damping
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The aim of this paper is to overhaul the quantum elucidation of the spectral density (SD) of weak H-bonds treated without taking into account any of the damping mechanisms. The reconsideration of the SD is performed within the framework the linear response theory. Working in the setting of the strong anharmonic coupling theory and the adiabatic approximation, the simplified expression of the classical SD, in the absence of dampings, is equated to be I Cl (ω) = Re[∫ 0 ∞ G Cl ( t )e –iΩ t d t ] in which the classical-like autocorrelation function (ACF), G Cl ( t ), is given by G Cl ( t ) = tr{ ρ (β){ μ (0)}{ μ ( t )} † }. With this consideration, we have shown that the classical SD is equivalent to the line shape obtained by F (ω) = Ω I Cl (ω), which in turn is equivalent to the quantum SD given by I Qu (ω) = Re[∫ 0 ∞ G Qu ( t )e –iΩ t d t ], where G Qu ( t ) is the corresponding quantum ACF having for expression G Qu ( t ) = (1/β) tr{ ρ ∫ 0 β [ μ(0)}{ μ ( t + iλℏ)} † dλ}. Thus, we have shown that for weak H-bonds dealt without dampings, the SDs obtained by the quantum approaches are equivalent to the SDs geted by the classical approach in which the incepation ACF is, however, of quantum nature and where the line shape is the Fourier transform of the ACF times the angular frequency. It is further shown that the classical approach dealing with the SD of weak H-bonds leads identically to the result found by Maréchal and Witkowski in their pioneering quantum treatment where they ignored the linear response theory and dampings.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
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".