MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4213132739 · doi:10.26434/chemrxiv-2022-qqgsw

Small basis set density-functional theory methods corrected with atom-centered potentials

2022· preprint· en· W4213132739 on OpenAlexafffund
Viki Kumar Prasad, Alberto Otero‐de‐la‐Roza, Gino A. DiLabio

Bibliographic record

VenueChemRxiv · 2022
Typepreprint
Languageen
FieldMaterials Science
TopicMachine Learning in Materials Science
Canadian institutionsUniversity of British Columbia
FundersAgencia Estatal de InvestigaciónBritish Columbia Knowledge Development FundNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of CanadaUniversity of British ColumbiaMinisterio de Ciencia e InnovaciónWestern Canada Research GridSantenCompute Canada
KeywordsBasis setDensity functional theoryBasis (linear algebra)ThermochemistryAtom (system on chip)Coupled clusterCovalent bondSet (abstract data type)Work (physics)Computational chemistryChemistryCluster (spacecraft)Atomic physicsMoleculeStatistical physicsPhysicsThermodynamicsQuantum mechanicsMathematicsComputer sciencePhysical chemistry

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Density-functional theory (DFT) is currently the most popular method for modeling non-covalent interactions and thermochemistry. The accurate calculation of non-covalent interaction energies, reaction energies, and barrier heights requires choosing an appropriate functional and, typically, a relatively large basis set. Deficiencies of the density-functional approximation and the use of a limited basis set are the leading sources of error in the calculation of non-covalent and thermochemical properties in molecular systems. In this article, we present three new DFT methods based on the BLYP, M062X and CAM-B3LYP functionals in combination with the 6-31G* basis set and corrected with atom-centered potentials (ACPs). ACPs are one-electron potentials that have the same form as effective-core potentials, except they do not replace any electrons. The ACPs developed in this work are used to generate energy corrections to the underlying DFT/basis-set method such that the errors in predicted chemical properties are minimized while maintaining the low computational cost of the parent methods. ACPs were developed for the elements H, B, C, N, O, F, Si, P, S, and Cl. The ACP parameters were determined using an extensive training set of 118,655 data points, mostly of complete basis set coupled-cluster level quality. The target molecular properties for the ACP-corrected methods include non-covalent interaction energies, molecular conformational energies, reaction energies, barrier heights, and bond separation energies. The ACPs were tested first on the training set and then on a validation set of 42,567 additional data points. We show that the ACP-corrected methods can predict the target molecular properties with accuracy close to complete basis set wavefunction theory methods, but at a computational cost of double-ζ DFT methods. This makes the new BLYP/6-31G*-ACP, M062X/6-31G*-ACP, and CAM-B3LYP/6-31G*-ACP methods uniquely suited to the calculation of non-covalent, thermochemical, and kinetic properties in large molecular systems.

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)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.004
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: Methods · Consensus signal: Methods
Teacher disagreement score0.012
Threshold uncertainty score0.040

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.004
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0020.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0030.002
Bibliometrics0.0020.003
Science and technology studies0.0020.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0050.002
Research integrity0.0030.004
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0120.005

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 head0.050
GPT teacher head0.308
Teacher spread0.258 · 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
GenreMethods

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

Citations0
Published2022
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueChemRxivSame topicMachine Learning in Materials ScienceFrench-language works237,207