MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W4396972636 · doi:10.26434/chemrxiv-2024-4gl8d

Importance of density functional approximation for the prediction of metalloporphyrin catalyst activities for oxygen reduction

2024· preprint· en· W4396972636 on OpenAlexafffund
Brett Henderson, Sofia Donnecke, Scott N. Genin, Ilya G. Ryabinkin, Irina Paci

Bibliographic record

VenueChemRxiv · 2024
Typepreprint
Languageen
FieldEnergy
TopicElectrocatalysts for Energy Conversion
Canadian institutionsOTI Lumionics (Canada)University of Victoria
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada
KeywordsHybrid functionalDensity functional theoryCatalysisReduction (mathematics)MoleculeWork (physics)OxygenSpin (aerodynamics)Ground statePhase (matter)Computational chemistryFunctional groupElectronic structureChemistryMaterials scienceChemical physicsThermodynamicsPhysicsMathematicsQuantum mechanicsOrganic chemistry

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Metalloporphyrins, a class of compounds widely encountered in nature, present intriguing structural and electronic properties for a number of applications, including as oxygen reduction catalysts. However, computational investigations of metalloporphyrin-catalyzed reactions have been hampered by their complex electronic structures. In the present study, we test the sensitivity of metalloporphyrin catalyst activities to the chosen functional in density functional theory. We find a significant split between pure (GGA) and hybrid functionals, with hybrid functionals, in particular B3LYP, showing greater agreement with DLPNO-CCSD(T) reaction energies. Notably, double-hybrids offered no noticeable improvement over the much more computationally efficient B3LYP and PBE0. Other discrepancies between functionals, including ground state spin and geometry, are also considered in this work. Finally, both hybrid and double-hybrid functionals greatly reduced the gas phase errors associated with the main group molecules in the oxygen reduction reaction relative to GGA calculations, leading us to question the application of widely used empirical corrections to O$_2$.

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)0.003
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: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.006
Threshold uncertainty score0.011

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0020.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.023
GPT teacher head0.230
Teacher spread0.207 · 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

Citations0
Published2024
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueChemRxiv→Same topicElectrocatalysts for Energy Conversion→French-language works237,207→