MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4389742438 · doi:10.1063/5.0176714

Analytic expressions for correlations in coarse-grained simple fluids

2023· article· en· W4389742438 on OpenAlexafffund
Siwei Luo, Mark Thachuk

Bibliographic record

VenueThe Journal of Chemical Physics · 2023
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMaterials Science
TopicMaterial Dynamics and Properties
Canadian institutionsUniversity of British Columbia
FundersRES’EAU-WaterNET
KeywordsGranularityQuadratic equationA priori and a posterioriStatistical physicsMathematicsSimple (philosophy)Work (physics)Applied mathematicsComputer sciencePhysicsGeometry

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Coarse-graining of fluids is challenging because fluid particles are unbound and diffuse long distances in time. One approach creates coarse-grain variables that group all particles within a region centered on specific points in space and accounts for the movement of particles among such regions. In our previous work, we showed that in many cases, potential interactions for such a scheme adopted a generalized quadratic form, whose parameters depend on means, variances, and correlation coefficients among the coarse-grain variables. In this work, we use statistical mechanics to derive analytic expressions for these parameters, using properties of the fluid, including pair distribution functions. These expressions are compared against simulation-derived values and shown to be in good agreement. This approach can be used to calculate a priori the potential for any homogeneous, simple fluid, without the need for fitting procedures or matching, thus increasing the ease of use of this coarse-grain scheme and creating a foundation for large-scale bottom-up simulations. Furthermore, these expressions provide a quantitative way of studying the boundary between discrete (atomic) and continuum models of fluids.

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 score0.240
Threshold uncertainty score0.157

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 studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
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 head0.033
GPT teacher head0.283
Teacher spread0.250 · 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

Citations0
Published2023
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueThe Journal of Chemical PhysicsSame topicMaterial Dynamics and PropertiesFrench-language works237,207