MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4411772687 · doi:10.1002/qua.70072

A Practical Guide to Predict Resonance Raman Spectra Using <scp>DFT</scp> Across Various Software Platforms

2025· article· en· W4411772687 on OpenAlexafffund
Lucille Kuster

Bibliographic record

VenueInternational Journal of Quantum Chemistry · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBiochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology
TopicSpectroscopy Techniques in Biomedical and Chemical Research
Canadian institutionsUniversité du Québec à Montréal
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of CanadaAlliance de recherche numérique du Canada
KeywordsRaman spectroscopySoftwareResonance (particle physics)Spectral lineComputer scienceMaterials scienceNuclear magnetic resonanceAnalytical Chemistry (journal)ChemistryPhysicsAtomic physicsEnvironmental chemistryOpticsOperating systemQuantum mechanics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

ABSTRACT Raman spectroscopy, when combined with Density Functional Theory (DFT) calculations, is a powerful method for investigating the vibrational properties of a broad range of molecular systems. When the Raman laser's wavelength resonates with the molecule's electronic transitions absorption, certain vibrational peaks are significantly amplified in the resulting spectrum. This effect, known as Resonance Raman (rR) spectroscopy, enhances the detection of molecular features and allows the observation of species at low concentrations. However, predicting rR spectra through DFT presents significant computational challenges. The theoretical modeling of rR spectra is more complex than non‐resonant Raman spectra and less documented in the literature. This guide aims to address this gap by providing detailed and practical instructions for predicting rR spectra using various computational chemistry software, including ORCA, Gaussian, and ADF. The methods outlined are designed to help researchers accurately model rR spectra, providing deeper insights into molecular structure, reactivity, and chemical transformations.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.004
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 score0.125
Threshold uncertainty score0.697

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.004
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 science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
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 head0.018
GPT teacher head0.405
Teacher spread0.386 · 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

Citations2
Published2025
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueInternational Journal of Quantum ChemistrySame topicSpectroscopy Techniques in Biomedical and Chemical ResearchFrench-language works237,207