MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2939868671 · doi:10.1021/acs.jpca.9b06135

Correction to “Evaluating Transition Metal Barrier Heights with the Latest Density Functional Theory Exchange–Correlation Functionals: The MOBH35 Benchmark Database”

2019· erratum· en· W2939868671 on OpenAlexfundno aff
Mark A. Iron, Trevor Janes

Bibliographic record

VenueThe Journal of Physical Chemistry A · 2019
Typeerratum
Languageen
FieldMaterials Science
TopicNuclear Materials and Properties
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersAzrieli FoundationWeizmann Institute of Science
KeywordsBenchmark (surveying)Density functional theoryDatabaseCorrelationComputer scienceData miningComputational chemistryChemistryMathematicsGeographyGeometryCartography

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

ADVERTISEMENT RETURN TO ISSUEPREVAddition/CorrectionNEXTORIGINAL ARTICLEThis notice is a correctionCorrection to "Evaluating Transition Metal Barrier Heights with the Latest Density Functional Theory Exchange–Correlation Functionals: The MOBH35 Benchmark Database"Mark A. Iron*Mark A. IronMore by Mark A. Ironhttp://orcid.org/0000-0001-9774-2358 and Trevor JanesTrevor JanesMore by Trevor Janeshttp://orcid.org/0000-0002-5469-0495Cite this: J. Phys. Chem. A 2019, 123, 29, 6379–6380Publication Date (Web):July 15, 2019Publication History Published online15 July 2019Published inissue 25 July 2019https://pubs.acs.org/doi/10.1021/acs.jpca.9b06135https://doi.org/10.1021/acs.jpca.9b06135correctionACS PublicationsCopyright © 2019 American Chemical Society. This publication is available under these Terms of Use. Request reuse permissions This publication is free to access through this site. Learn MoreArticle Views2114Altmetric-Citations30LEARN ABOUT THESE METRICSArticle Views are the COUNTER-compliant sum of full text article downloads since November 2008 (both PDF and HTML) across all institutions and individuals. These metrics are regularly updated to reflect usage leading up to the last few days.Citations are the number of other articles citing this article, calculated by Crossref and updated daily. Find more information about Crossref citation counts.The Altmetric Attention Score is a quantitative measure of the attention that a research article has received online. Clicking on the donut icon will load a page at altmetric.com with additional details about the score and the social media presence for the given article. Find more information on the Altmetric Attention Score and how the score is calculated. Share Add toView InAdd Full Text with ReferenceAdd Description ExportRISCitationCitation and abstractCitation and referencesMore Options Share onFacebookTwitterWechatLinked InRedditEmail PDF (243 KB) Get e-AlertscloseSupporting Info (1)»Supporting Information Supporting Information Get e-Alerts

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)0.004
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.027
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation 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: Other · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.298
Threshold uncertainty score0.998

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0040.027
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0020.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0030.002
Bibliometrics0.0030.005
Science and technology studies0.0030.001
Scholarly communication0.0040.003
Open science0.0060.003
Research integrity0.0030.006
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.2980.144

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 head0.018
GPT teacher head0.236
Teacher spread0.218 · 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 designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreOther

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

Citations66
Published2019
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueThe Journal of Physical Chemistry ASame topicNuclear Materials and PropertiesFrench-language works237,207