MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3082161020 · doi:10.1002/jcc.26404

Toward universal substituent constants: Model chemistry sensitivity of descriptors from the quantum theory of atoms in molecules

2020· article· en· W3082161020 on OpenAlexafffund
Kevin M. Lefrancois‐Gagnon, Robert C. Mawhinney

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Computational Chemistry · 2020
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldChemistry
TopicCrystallography and molecular interactions
Canadian institutionsLakehead University
FundersCompute CanadaGovernment of OntarioLakehead University
KeywordsChemistryQuantum chemistryAtoms in moleculesSubstituentComputational chemistryBasis setMoleculeBasis (linear algebra)Electronic structureDensity functional theorySensitivity (control systems)Bond lengthQuantumStatistical physicsQuantum mechanicsMathematicsStereochemistryPhysicsOrganic chemistryGeometry

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The quantum theory of atoms in molecules (QTAIM) provides a theoretical foundation to determine the properties of functional groups through additive atomic contributions. Many studies have used QTAIM in their analyses with a variety of electronic structure methods, but it is unknown if the properties measured using one model chemistry, the combination of the electronic structure method and basis set, can be compared to those measured by another. Here, we evaluate the sensitivity of QTAIM functional group and bond critical point properties using six functionals and seven basis sets. High-level B2PLYPD3-BJ/aug-cc-pV5Z reference values are provided for 116 functional groups and the property sensitivity with respect to these values are evaluated based on absolute deviations and by assessing linear relationships. Functional group properties, including charges, dipoles, quadrupoles and volumes, were found to be mostly insensitive to choice of computational model chemistry. However, due to structural and topological inconsistencies, the 6-31G(d) basis set is not recommended for use. Bond critical point properties varied with choice of model chemistry, but models incorporating hybrid functionals and triple-ζ basis sets provided values suitable for use in regression studies.

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)0.008
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.024
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.008
Threshold uncertainty score0.044

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0080.024
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0020.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.002
Open science0.0010.002
Research integrity0.0010.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.024
GPT teacher head0.231
Teacher spread0.207 · 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 designSimulation or modeling
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

Citations8
Published2020
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Computational ChemistrySame topicCrystallography and molecular interactionsFrench-language works237,207