Constrained iterative Hirshfeld charges: A variational approach
Bibliographic record
Abstract
We develop a variational procedure for the iterative Hirshfeld (HI) partitioning scheme. The main practical advantage of having a variational framework is that it provides a formal and straightforward approach for imposing constraints (e.g., fixed charges on certain atoms or molecular fragments) when computing HI atoms and their properties. Unlike many other variants of the Hirshfeld partitioning scheme, HI charges do not arise naturally from the information-theoretic framework, but only as a reverse-engineered construction of the objective function. However, the procedure we use is quite general and could be applied to other problems as well. We also prove that there is always at least one solution to the HI equations, but we could not prove that its self-consistent equations would always converge for any given initial pro-atom charges. Our numerical assessment of the constrained iterative Hirshfeld method shows that it satisfies many desirable traits of atoms in molecules and has the potential to surpass existing approaches for adding constraints when computing atomic properties.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
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".