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 OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

fundA Canadian funder is recorded on the work.
no affNo Canadian affiliation: this work is invisible to an affiliation-only frame.
No Canadian affiliation. An affiliation-only frame, the usual design, would never have seen this work. It is one of the works that make the case for inverting the frame.

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.

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)0.003
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
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 score0.061
Threshold uncertainty score0.999

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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 head0.018
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