MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2801114040 · doi:10.1063/1.5025171

On-top density functionals for the short-range dynamic correlation between electrons of opposite and parallel spin

2018· article· en· W2801114040 on OpenAlexafffund
Joshua W. Hollett, Nicholas Pegoretti

Bibliographic record

VenueThe Journal of Chemical Physics · 2018
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPhysics and Astronomy
TopicAdvanced Chemical Physics Studies
Canadian institutionsUniversity of WinnipegUniversity of Manitoba
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada
KeywordsElectronCusp (singularity)IonizationAtomic physicsDensity functional theoryRange (aeronautics)Exponential functionSpin (aerodynamics)PhysicsMaterials scienceIonQuantum mechanicsMathematics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Separate, one-parameter, on-top density functionals are derived for the short-range dynamic correlation between opposite and parallel-spin electrons, in which the electron-electron cusp is represented by an exponential function. The combination of both functionals is referred to as the Opposite-spin exponential-cusp and Fermi-hole correction (OF) functional. The two parameters of the OF functional are set by fitting the ionization energies and electron affinities, of the atoms He to Ar, predicted by ROHF in combination with the OF functional to the experimental values. For ionization energies, the overall performance of ROHF-OF is better than completely renormalized coupled-cluster [CR-CC(2,3)] and better than, or as good as, conventional density functional methods. For electron affinities, the overall performance of ROHF-OF is less impressive. However, for both ionization energies and electron affinities of third row atoms, the mean absolute error of ROHF-OF is only 3 kJ mol−1.

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)0.003
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.004
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 score0.012
Threshold uncertainty score0.039

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.004
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0020.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.002
Bibliometrics0.0020.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.002
Open science0.0050.002
Research integrity0.0020.003
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0120.003

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 head0.017
GPT teacher head0.284
Teacher spread0.267 · 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

Citations3
Published2018
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

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