Application of XDM to ionic solids: The importance of dispersion for bulk moduli and crystal geometries
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Dispersion corrections are essential in the description of intermolecular interactions; however, dispersion-corrected functionals must also be transferrable to hard solids. The exchange-hole dipole moment (XDM) model has demonstrated excellent performance for non-covalent interactions. In this article, we examine its ability to describe the relative stability, geometry, and compressibility of simple ionic solids. For the specific cases of the cesium halides, XDM-corrected functionals correctly predict the energy ranking of the B1 and B2 forms, and a dispersion contribution is required to obtain this result. Furthermore, for the lattice constants of the 20 alkali halides, the performance of XDM-corrected functionals is excellent, provided that the base functional's exchange enhancement factor properly captures non-bonded repulsion. The mean absolute errors in lattice constants obtained with B86bPBE-XDM and B86bPBE-25X-XDM are 0.060 Å and 0.039 Å, respectively, suggesting that delocalization error also plays a minor role in these systems. Finally, we considered the calculation of bulk moduli for alkali halides and alkaline-earth oxides. Previous claims in the literature that simple generalized gradient approximations, such as PBE, can reliably predict experimental bulk moduli have benefited from large error cancellations between neglecting both dispersion and vibrational effects. If vibrational effects are taken into account, dispersion-corrected functionals are quite accurate (4 GPa-5 GPa average error), again, if non-bonded repulsion is correctly represented. Careful comparisons of the calculated bulk moduli with experimental data are needed to avoid systematic biases and misleading conclusions.
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 | 0.000 | 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".