MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4405131925 · doi:10.29173/eureka28818

Representing The World Around Us: Applications of Group Representation Theory to Molecular Orbital (MO) Theory

2024· article· en· W4405131925 on OpenAlexaffvenue
M. Humayun

Bibliographic record

VenueEureka · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldChemistry
TopicHistory and advancements in chemistry
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Calgary
Fundersnot available
KeywordsGroup (periodic table)Molecular orbital theoryRepresentation theoryRepresentation (politics)Group representationMolecular orbitalTheoretical physicsPhysicsMathematicsPure mathematicsQuantum mechanicsMoleculePolitical science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Molecular orbital (MO) theory is a theory at the forefront of modern chemistry, allowing for accurate descriptions of reactivity of molecules by using quantum mechanics to predict the location of electrons within a molecule, and their corresponding energies. The equations which govern their behavior, the Schrodinger equation, are often difficult to solve. Often, we can only approximate a solution using numerical methods. This paper discusses a method which exploits a molecule’s internal symmetry. Specifically, we use Group representation theory to help analyze and break down the molecular symmetry, and then use the analysis to help us find the MO’s. First, we establish key results about irreducible representations and characters. We then establish a correspondence between MO’s and irreducible representations. We then use the results we obtained to perform MO calculations on water (H2O). We then compare the results obtained via our MO theory calculations and Valance Bond Theory (VBT). We conclude by showing these calculations are best used for rough work, being most useful for deciding which atomic orbitals they arose from, and each MO’s energies relative to each other.

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: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: Theoretical or conceptual
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.003
Threshold uncertainty score0.009

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.003
Scholarly communication0.0020.003
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.000

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 head0.011
GPT teacher head0.294
Teacher spread0.283 · 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 designTheoretical or conceptual
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 venueEurekaSame topicHistory and advancements in chemistryFrench-language works237,207