Spin-orbit coupling from a two-component self-consistent approach. II. Non-collinear density functional theories
Post-publication record
Source: Retraction Watch, joined by DOI. OpenAlex records retraction as is_retracted, a boolean over a state space with at least four values, so it cannot express an expression of concern, a correction or a reinstatement; it reports them as false, which reads as “fine”.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
We revise formal and numerical aspects of collinear and noncollinear density functional theory (DFT) in the context of a two-component self-consistent treatment of spin-orbit coupling (SOC). While the extension of the standard one-component theory to a noncollinear magnetization is formally well-defined within the local density approximation, and therefore results in a numerically stable theory, this is not the case within the generalized gradient approximation (GGA). Previously reported formulations of noncollinear DFT based on GGA exchange-correlation potentials have several limitations: (i) they fail at reducing (either formally or numerically) to the proper collinear limit (i.e., when the magnetization is parallel or antiparallel to the z axis everywhere in space); (ii) they fail at ensuring a quantitative rotational invariance of the total energy and even a qualitative rotational invariance of the spatial distribution of the magnetization when a SOC operator is included in the Hamiltonian; (iii) they are numerically very unstable in regions of small magnetization. All of the above-mentioned problems are here shown (both formally and through test examples) to be solved by using instead a new formulation of noncollinear DFT for GGA functionals, which we call the "signed canonical" theory, as combined with an effective screening algorithm for unstable terms of the exchange-correlation potential in regions of small magnetization. All methods are implemented in the CRYSTAL program and tests are performed on simple molecules to compare the different formulations of noncollinear DFT.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
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".