MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2805067366 · doi:10.1063/1.5039742

Communication: Correct charge transfer in CT complexes from the Becke’05 density functional

2018· article· en· W2805067366 on OpenAlexafffund
Axel D. Becke, Stephen G. Dale, Erin R. Johnson

Bibliographic record

VenueThe Journal of Chemical Physics · 2018
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMaterials Science
TopicLanthanide and Transition Metal Complexes
Canadian institutionsDalhousie University
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada
KeywordsDensity functional theoryTransfer (computing)Charge (physics)Materials sciencePhysicsBiological systemMolecular physicsComputer scienceChemistryComputational chemistryQuantum mechanicsBiology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

It has been known for over twenty years that density functionals of the generalized-gradient approximation (GGA) type and exact-exchange-GGA hybrids with low exact-exchange mixing fraction yield enormous errors in the properties of charge-transfer (CT) complexes. Manifestations of this error have also plagued computations of CT excitation energies. GGAs transfer far too much charge in CT complexes. This error has therefore come to be called “delocalization” error. It remains, to this day, a vexing unsolved problem in density-functional theory (DFT). Here we report that a 100% exact-exchange-based density functional known as Becke’05 or “B05” [A. D. Becke, J. Chem. Phys. 119, 2972 (2003); 122, 064101 (2005)] predicts excellent charge transfers in classic CT complexes involving the electron donors NH3, C2H4, HCN, and C2H2 and electron acceptors F2 and Cl2. Our approach is variational, as in our recent “B05min” dipole moments paper [Dale et al., J. Chem. Phys. 147, 154103 (2017)]. Therefore B05 is not only an accurate DFT for thermochemistry but is promising as a solution to the delocalization problem as well.

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)0.001
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: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: Bench or experimental
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.017
Threshold uncertainty score0.628

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.040
GPT teacher head0.251
Teacher spread0.211 · 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 designBench or experimental
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

Citations23
Published2018
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueThe Journal of Chemical PhysicsSame topicLanthanide and Transition Metal ComplexesFrench-language works237,207