MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3165924623 · doi:10.1063/5.0050993

Requirements for an accurate dispersion-corrected density functional

2021· article· en· W3165924623 on OpenAlexafffund
Alastair J. A. Price, Kyle R. Bryenton, Erin R. Johnson

Bibliographic record

VenueThe Journal of Chemical Physics · 2021
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPhysics and Astronomy
TopicAdvanced Chemical Physics Studies
Canadian institutionsDalhousie University
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada
KeywordsDispersion (optics)Statistical physicsDelocalized electronDensity functional theoryNorm (philosophy)Work (physics)Pairwise comparisonBase (topology)Computer sciencePhysicsMathematicsQuantum mechanicsMathematical analysisArtificial intelligence

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Post-self-consistent dispersion corrections are now the norm when applying density-functional theory to systems where non-covalent interactions play an important role. However, there is a wide range of base functionals and dispersion corrections available from which to choose. In this work, we opine on the most desirable requirements to ensure that both the base functional and dispersion correction, individually, are as accurate as possible for non-bonded repulsion and dispersion attraction. The base functional should be dispersionless, numerically stable, and involve minimal delocalization error. Simultaneously, the dispersion correction should include finite damping, higher-order pairwise dispersion terms, and electronic many-body effects. These criteria are essential for avoiding reliance on error cancellation and obtaining correct results from correct physics.

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)0.010
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.031
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: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.010
Threshold uncertainty score0.052

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0100.031
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.001
Bibliometrics0.0020.001
Science and technology studies0.0030.002
Scholarly communication0.0020.004
Open science0.0040.002
Research integrity0.0040.004
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0050.005

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 head0.039
GPT teacher head0.294
Teacher spread0.254 · 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

Citations87
Published2021
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueThe Journal of Chemical PhysicsSame topicAdvanced Chemical Physics StudiesFrench-language works237,207