MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3104569370

Non-conformal coarse-grained potentials for water

2017· article· en· W3104569370 on OpenAlexfundno aff

Bibliographic record

VenueTU/e Research Portal (Eindhoven University of Technology) · 2017
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBiochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology
TopicProtein Structure and Dynamics
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of CanadaConsejo Nacional de Ciencia y Tecnología
KeywordsConformal mapMonatomic ionDipolePoint particleSimplex algorithmStatistical physicsInversion (geology)Charge densityPoint (geometry)Liquid waterTransferabilityPhysicsMaterials scienceComputer scienceAlgorithmMathematicsThermodynamicsMathematical analysisClassical mechanicsGeometryQuantum mechanicsGeology
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

<p>Water is a notoriously difficult substance to model both accurately and efficiently. Here, we focus on descriptions with a single coarse-grained particle per molecule using the so-called approximate non-conformal and generalized Stockmayer potentials as the starting points. They are fitted using the radial distribution function and the liquid-gas density profile of the atomistic extended simple point charge (SPC/E) model by downhill simplex optimization. We compare the results with monatomic water (mW), ELBA, and direct iterative Boltzmann inversion of SPC/E. The results show that symmetrical potentials result in non-transferable models, that is, they need to be reparametrized for new state points. This indicates that transferability may require more complex models. Furthermore, the results also show that the addition of a point dipole is not sufficient to make the potentials accurate and transferable to different temperatures (300 K-500 K) and pressures without an appropriate choice of properties as targets during model optimization.</p>

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 score0.057
Threshold uncertainty score0.499

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 studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.001
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 head0.016
GPT teacher head0.292
Teacher spread0.275 · 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

Citations5
Published2017
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueTU/e Research Portal (Eindhoven University of Technology)Same topicProtein Structure and DynamicsFrench-language works237,207