MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4415266472 · doi:10.26434/chemrxiv-2025-8frz4

A Template‑Based Automatic Fragmentation Algorithm for Complex and Large Systems in the Generalized Energy‑Based Fragmentation Framework

2025· article· W4415266472 on OpenAlexaff
Xuerong Wang, Linke He, Jin Wen, Jianyi Wang, Wei Li, Shuhua Li

Bibliographic record

VenueChemRxiv · 2025
Typearticle
Language
FieldEngineering
TopicRadiation Effects in Electronics
Canadian institutionsMinistry of Education and Child Care
FundersNational Natural Science Foundation of China
KeywordsFragmentation (computing)SubstructureBottleneckTemplateBridging (networking)Granularity

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

A major bottleneck in low‑scaling energy‑based fragmentation methods is the need for manual intervention in the fragmentation step, which is time‑consuming, inconsistent, and hard to generalize across diverse molecular system. To address this challenge, we develop a template‑based automatic fragmentation algorithm that extends the generalized energy‑based fragmentation (GEBF) approach to a wide range of large and complex molecules. A hierarchical SMILES‑encoded GEBF template library for both cyclic and acyclic functional groups enables chemically meaningful and efficient partitioning via structure conversion, macrocycle detection, substructure matching, and small‑fragment merging. Controlling fragment sizes ensures a balance between accuracy and computational cost, while user‑defined templates offer enhanced flexibility. Benchmarks on biomacromolecules, macrocycles, porous organic cages, polyamide oligomers, and ionic liquids reproduce conventional quantum‑chemistry results within a few kcal$\cdot$mol$^{-1}$ (or sub‑meV/atom), while reducing the largest subsystem basis size to less than one‑third of the full system. Experimental‑level agreement is achieved in structural and spectroscopic predictions, and systems with $\approx$1,500 atoms are computed within practical timeframes. This work paves the way for fully automated, scalable, low‑cost, high‑accuracy quantum chemistry, bridging theory and large‑scale real‑world applications.

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)0.002
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: none
Teacher disagreement score0.006
Threshold uncertainty score0.020

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0030.002
Research integrity0.0010.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0060.002

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 head0.274
Teacher spread0.263 · 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
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueChemRxivSame topicRadiation Effects in ElectronicsFrench-language works237,207