MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2953259211 · doi:10.1021/acs.jpclett.9b01401

Fundamental Role of Fock Exchange in Relativistic Density Functional Theory

2019· article· en· W2953259211 on OpenAlexafffund
Jacques K. Desmarais, Jean‐Pierre Flament, Alessandro Erba

Bibliographic record

VenueThe Journal of Physical Chemistry Letters · 2019
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPhysics and Astronomy
TopicPhysics of Superconductivity and Magnetism
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Saskatchewan
FundersDivision of Materials ResearchNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of CanadaUniversité de Lille
KeywordsSpinorFock spaceDiagonalOperator (biology)Functional theoryDensity functional theoryPhysicsDensity matrixSpin (aerodynamics)Coupling (piping)Theoretical physicsQuantum mechanicsMathematicsChemistryMaterials scienceGeometryQuantum

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

We perform a formal analysis of relativistic density functional theory for the treatment of spin-orbit coupling (SOC), noncollinear magnetization (NCM), and orbital current density (OCD). We identify specific components of the spinors (namely, those mapped onto imaginary diagonal spin-blocks of the density matrix) that arise from the SOC operator and define the OCD. We show that these pieces of the spinors only enter in the bielectronic part of the potential through the exact Fock exchange (FE) operator. The lack of FE therefore leads to a correspondingly incorrect physical description of SOC, NCM, and OCD. This analysis is complemented with an illustrative example, where we show that, while in the absence of FE, the theory fails even at reproducing the expected right-hand relationship between the NCM and OCD, its inclusion provides results that match those from a reference SOC configuration-interaction calculation.

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)0.000
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 score0.246
Threshold uncertainty score0.357

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
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 science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.006
GPT teacher head0.195
Teacher spread0.189 · 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

Citations26
Published2019
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueThe Journal of Physical Chemistry LettersSame topicPhysics of Superconductivity and MagnetismFrench-language works237,207