MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4205170231 · doi:10.1063/5.0076494

Three-body potential energy surface for <i>para</i>-hydrogen

2022· article· en· W4205170231 on OpenAlexafffund
Alexander Ibrahim, Pierre–Nicholas Roy

Bibliographic record

VenueThe Journal of Chemical Physics · 2022
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPhysics and Astronomy
TopicQuantum, superfluid, helium dynamics
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Waterloo
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of CanadaCanada Research Chairs
KeywordsAb initioPotential energyConfiguration interactionCoupled clusterPotential energy surfaceInteraction energyChemistryYukawa potentialAb initio quantum chemistry methodsEquilateral triangleMolecular physicsPhysicsAtomic physicsMoleculeQuantum mechanicsExcited stateGeometryMathematics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

We present a 3D isotropic ab initio three-body (para-H2)3 interaction potential energy surface (PES). The electronic structure calculations are carried out at the correlated coupled-cluster theory level, with single, double, and perturbative triple excitations. The calculations use an augmented correlation-consistent triple zeta basis set and a supplementary midbond function. We construct the PES using the reproducing-kernel Hilbert space toolkit [O. T. Unke and M. Meuwly, J. Chem. Inf. Model. 57, 1923 (2017)] with phenomenological and empirical adjustments to account for short-range and long-range behaviors. The (para-H2)3 interaction energies deviate drastically from the Axilrod–Teller–Muto (ATM) potential at short intermolecular separations. We find that the configuration of three para-H2 molecules at the corners of an equilateral triangle is responsible for the majority of the (para-H2)3 interaction energy contribution in a hexagonal-close-packed lattice. In cases where two para-H2 molecules are close to one another while the third is far away, the (para-H2)3 interaction PES takes the form of a modified version of the ATM potential. We expect the combination of this PES together with a first-principles para-H2–para-H2 adiabatic hindered rotor potential to outperform a widely used effective pair potential for condensed many-body systems of para-H2.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
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: none
Teacher disagreement score0.006
Threshold uncertainty score0.021

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0020.001
Research integrity0.0020.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0060.002

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 head0.009
GPT teacher head0.228
Teacher spread0.218 · 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

Citations9
Published2022
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueThe Journal of Chemical PhysicsSame topicQuantum, superfluid, helium dynamicsFrench-language works237,207