pith. sign in

arxiv: 2605.21105 · v1 · pith:MX7JJCCInew · submitted 2026-05-20 · ⚛️ physics.chem-ph

Information-Theoretic Appraisal of Electron Densities

Abdulrahman Y. Zamani , Kevin Carter-Fenk This is my paper

Pith reviewed 2026-05-21 01:48 UTC · model grok-4.3

classification ⚛️ physics.chem-ph
keywords electron densitiesinformation entropyJ-divergencebenchmarkingquantum chemistrydensity functionalscoupled clustersymmetry breaking
0
0 comments X

The pith

The J-divergence from position-space information entropy benchmarks electron densities obtained from single-reference methods against coupled cluster and configuration interaction references.

A machine-rendered reading of the paper's core claim, the machinery that carries it, and where it could break.

This paper applies information entropy measures evaluated in position space to assess and compare atomic and molecular electron densities across ground states and scenarios such as excitation, confinement, and ensemblization. It identifies the J-divergence as a practical metric that ranks how closely densities from single-reference approaches match those from high-level coupled cluster and configuration interaction calculations. The assessment further contrasts mean-field orbital information with Brueckner and Dyson orbitals while tracking informational shifts in self-consistent-field solutions under symmetry breaking. Links are drawn between entropic measures of electron delocalization and the accuracy of computed properties such as the carbon monoxide dipole moment. The results suggest practical guidance for choosing reference determinants in chemical applications and indicate value in using entropy concepts when constructing new density functionals.

Core claim

Information entropy measures evaluated in position space allow comparisons across electron densities from single-reference methods, with the J-divergence serving as a key benchmarking metric against coupled cluster and configuration interaction references. The work covers ground-state and excited densities under confinement and ensemble conditions, compares mean-field orbital information to that of Brueckner and Dyson orbitals, and examines informational changes across multiple self-consistent-field solutions under symmetry-breaking conditions. It also relates entropic measures of electron delocalization to the accuracy of the CO dipole moment computed by different methods, yielding insights

What carries the argument

The J-divergence derived from information entropy measures evaluated in position space, used to benchmark and compare electron densities across quantum chemistry methods.

If this is right

  • Single-reference densities can be ranked for closeness to high-level references using the J-divergence without direct computation of observables.
  • Reference determinants for a given chemical application can be chosen by minimizing informational divergence to a target high-level density.
  • Symmetry-breaking effects on electron densities can be quantified through changes in position-space entropy measures.
  • Entropic delocalization measures correlate with the accuracy of properties such as the CO dipole moment across different methods.
  • Incorporating information-entropy concepts may aid the systematic construction of improved density functionals.

Where Pith is reading between the lines

These are editorial extensions of the paper, not claims the author makes directly.

  • The same divergence measures could be tested as a diagnostic tool inside self-consistent-field iterations to steer toward better reference states.
  • Application to larger molecules might expose systematic trends in method performance that energy-based errors alone do not reveal.
  • The approach could be extended to compare densities from different basis sets or to assess ensemble-averaged densities in thermal ensembles.

Load-bearing premise

Information entropy measures evaluated in position space provide a reliable and meaningful way to compare and benchmark densities obtained from single-reference methods against high-level references.

What would settle it

A direct comparison in which the density with the lowest J-divergence to a coupled-cluster reference fails to give the most accurate value for an observable such as the CO dipole moment or total energy.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 2605.21105 by Abdulrahman Y. Zamani, Kevin Carter-Fenk.

Figure 1
Figure 1. Figure 1: Jeffreys divergence with respect to CISD and CCSD densities for H [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p005_1.png] view at source ↗
Figure 2
Figure 2. Figure 2: Jeffreys divergence with respect to CISD and CCSD densities for (H [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p006_2.png] view at source ↗
Figure 3
Figure 3. Figure 3: Jeffreys divergence with respect to CISD and CCSD densities for Be. Results are obtained with [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p006_3.png] view at source ↗
Figure 4
Figure 4. Figure 4: Jeffreys divergence with respect to CISD and CCSD densities for O [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p007_4.png] view at source ↗
Figure 5
Figure 5. Figure 5: Jeffreys divergence relative to SCF and CISD densities for H [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p008_5.png] view at source ↗
Figure 6
Figure 6. Figure 6: Shannon entropy for N2 at 4Å under various symmetry breaking conditions. Results are obtained with the cc-pVTZ basis set [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p009_6.png] view at source ↗
Figure 7
Figure 7. Figure 7: Logarithm of Jeffreys divergence for incrementally stretched H [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p009_7.png] view at source ↗
Figure 8
Figure 8. Figure 8: Shannon entropies for neutral core S N1s ρ and core-hole S ch+ ρ orbitals of NH3 obtained at the calculated (CCSD(T)/cc-pVTZ) NIST geometry. The basis sets cc-pCVTZ and cc-pVTZ are assigned to N and H respectively. Confinement Molecules subject to spatial confinement can experience significant changes in bonding, electronic, and magnetic properties. For example, endohedral metallofullerenes 233,234 are hig… view at source ↗
Figure 9
Figure 9. Figure 9: Shannon entropies for free He, confined He, free C [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p011_9.png] view at source ↗
Figure 10
Figure 10. Figure 10: Information-theoretic measures for O3 Dyson orbitals. Dyson orbitals (DOs) are single-particle functions defined by the overlap of N and N ± 1 wavefunctions and are relevant to photoelectron spectroscopy and the one-electron picture of chemical bonding. 241,242 Their normalizations are determined from the probability factors or pole strengths which may lie between 0 and 1. 243 Since the information-theore… view at source ↗
Figure 11
Figure 11. Figure 11: Dyson orbitals for O3. electron attachment or detachment is close to unity, the corresponding MO from HF244 or even KS-DFT245 can be a good approximation to the DO. Final-state cations of ozone have been characterized in prior studies using electron propagator theory 246 and will be further examined here. Figure 10a compares the J-divergences between different orbitals. Vi￾sualizations performed with Vips… view at source ↗
Figure 12
Figure 12. Figure 12: Jeffreys divergence with respect to Brueckner orbitals for O [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p015_12.png] view at source ↗
Figure 13
Figure 13. Figure 13: Kullback-Leibler divergences and absolute Shannon entropy differences for CO at the NIST [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p016_13.png] view at source ↗
read the original abstract

We present an information-theoretic assessment of atomic and molecular densities in the ground state and under a range of physical scenarios--excitation, confinement, and ensemblization. Comparisons across densities obtained from single-reference methods are facilitated through information entropy measures evaluated in position space. We demonstrate that the J-divergence serves as a key metric for benchmarking electron densities against coupled cluster and configuration interaction references. Mean-field orbital information is further compared with that of Brueckner and Dyson orbitals, and informational changes in multiple self-consistent-field solutions are examined under various symmetry-breaking conditions. We also explore the relationship between entropic measures of electron delocalization and the accuracy of the CO dipole moment computed with different methods. Our work offers insights into the selection of optimal reference determinants for a given chemical application and highlights potential benefits of incorporating information-entropy concepts in the development of new density functionals.

Editorial analysis

A structured set of objections, weighed in public.

Desk editor's note, referee report, simulated authors' rebuttal, and a circularity audit. Tearing a paper down is the easy half of reading it; the pith above is the substance, this is the friction.

Referee Report

2 major / 2 minor

Summary. The manuscript presents an information-theoretic assessment of atomic and molecular electron densities in the ground state and under excitation, confinement, and ensemblization. It employs position-space information entropy measures to compare densities from single-reference methods, positions the J-divergence as a key benchmarking metric against coupled-cluster and configuration-interaction references, compares mean-field orbital information with Brueckner and Dyson orbitals, examines informational changes under symmetry breaking, and explores links between entropic delocalization measures and CO dipole-moment accuracy across methods.

Significance. If the central claims hold, the work could supply a new lens for assessing approximate densities and selecting reference determinants, with possible implications for density-functional development. The introduction of J-divergence and related entropic quantities as diagnostic tools is conceptually novel, though its added value relative to established density or energy error metrics is not yet demonstrated.

major comments (2)
  1. [Abstract and §4] Abstract and §4 (Benchmarking section): the assertion that J-divergence 'serves as a key metric for benchmarking' is load-bearing for the central claim, yet the manuscript reports informational changes under various scenarios without showing that J-divergence orderings align with or improve upon known accuracy hierarchies (e.g., HF vs. CCSD(T) dipole or correlation-energy errors) on the same systems; a direct side-by-side comparison with integrated density differences is absent.
  2. [§5] §5 (CO dipole-moment analysis): the claimed relationship between entropic delocalization measures and dipole-moment accuracy is presented qualitatively; without reported correlation coefficients, regression statistics, or cross-validation across multiple molecules, the insight into 'optimal reference determinants' remains suggestive rather than conclusive.
minor comments (2)
  1. [Methods] Notation for the J-divergence and related entropy functionals is introduced without an explicit equation reference in the methods section; adding a numbered equation would improve clarity.
  2. [Figure 3] Figure captions for the symmetry-breaking panels do not state the basis set or level of theory used for the plotted densities.

Simulated Author's Rebuttal

2 responses · 0 unresolved

We thank the referee for the constructive and detailed report. The comments help clarify how to strengthen the presentation of J-divergence as a benchmarking tool and the quantitative support for the CO dipole analysis. We address each major comment below and indicate the revisions we will make.

read point-by-point responses

  1. Referee: [Abstract and §4] Abstract and §4 (Benchmarking section): the assertion that J-divergence 'serves as a key metric for benchmarking' is load-bearing for the central claim, yet the manuscript reports informational changes under various scenarios without showing that J-divergence orderings align with or improve upon known accuracy hierarchies (e.g., HF vs. CCSD(T) dipole or correlation-energy errors) on the same systems; a direct side-by-side comparison with integrated density differences is absent.

    Authors: We agree that an explicit side-by-side comparison would make the benchmarking claim more robust. The current manuscript uses J-divergence to quantify density differences against CC and CI references and shows that it distinguishes methods in a manner consistent with their expected accuracy, but we did not tabulate this against integrated density errors or dipole/correlation-energy hierarchies on the same set of systems. In the revised manuscript we will add a table (new Table X in §4) that directly compares J-divergence rankings with both integrated |Δρ| and the known accuracy orderings (HF < MP2 < CCSD < CCSD(T)) for the ground-state and perturbed cases already studied. This addition will demonstrate alignment without asserting that J-divergence supersedes energy-based metrics. revision: yes

  2. Referee: [§5] §5 (CO dipole-moment analysis): the claimed relationship between entropic delocalization measures and dipole-moment accuracy is presented qualitatively; without reported correlation coefficients, regression statistics, or cross-validation across multiple molecules, the insight into 'optimal reference determinants' remains suggestive rather than conclusive.

    Authors: The referee correctly notes that the §5 discussion is qualitative. We will revise the section to include Pearson correlation coefficients and simple linear-regression statistics between the entropic delocalization measures (Shannon entropy and related quantities) and the absolute dipole errors for CO across the methods considered. In addition, we will extend the same quantitative analysis to two further molecules (N₂ and H₂O) that were already computed in the study, thereby providing a limited cross-validation. The revised text will state the correlation values and their statistical significance while retaining the original qualitative interpretation. revision: yes

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged

No circularity: direct empirical comparisons of entropic measures on computed densities

full rationale

The paper performs an information-theoretic assessment by evaluating J-divergence and related entropy measures directly on position-space electron densities obtained from different quantum chemistry methods (HF, CC, CI, etc.). These are straightforward numerical comparisons and rankings against reference densities; no derivation chain exists in which a claimed prediction or first-principles result is constructed by fitting a parameter to a subset of the same data and then re-presenting the fitted quantity as an independent prediction. No self-citation is invoked as a uniqueness theorem or load-bearing premise, and the abstract and scope describe observational benchmarking rather than a closed deductive loop. The central claim therefore remains independent of its inputs.

Axiom & Free-Parameter Ledger

0 free parameters · 0 axioms · 0 invented entities

No free parameters, axioms, or invented entities are identifiable from the abstract; the approach relies on standard information theory and quantum chemistry concepts whose details are not provided.

pith-pipeline@v0.9.0 · 5672 in / 1028 out tokens · 37754 ms · 2026-05-21T01:48:22.012113+00:00 · methodology

discussion (0)

Sign in with ORCID, Apple, or X to comment. Anyone can read and Pith papers without signing in.

Lean theorems connected to this paper

Citations machine-checked in the Pith Canon. Every link opens the source theorem in the public Lean library.

  • IndisputableMonolith/Cost/FunctionalEquation.lean washburn_uniqueness_aczel echoes
    ?
    echoes

    ECHOES: this paper passage has the same mathematical shape or conceptual pattern as the Recognition theorem, but is not a direct formal dependency.

    We demonstrate that the J-divergence serves as a key metric for benchmarking electron densities against coupled cluster and configuration interaction references.

  • IndisputableMonolith/Cost.lean Jcost echoes
    ?
    echoes

    ECHOES: this paper passage has the same mathematical shape or conceptual pattern as the Recognition theorem, but is not a direct formal dependency.

    J-D = KLD(ρ1∥ρ2) + KLD(ρ2∥ρ1). This is known as the Jeffreys divergence (J-D).

What do these tags mean?
matches
The paper's claim is directly supported by a theorem in the formal canon.
supports
The theorem supports part of the paper's argument, but the paper may add assumptions or extra steps.
extends
The paper goes beyond the formal theorem; the theorem is a base layer rather than the whole result.
uses
The paper appears to rely on the theorem as machinery.
contradicts
The paper's claim conflicts with a theorem or certificate in the canon.
unclear
Pith found a possible connection, but the passage is too broad, indirect, or ambiguous to say the theorem truly supports the claim.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

288 extracted references · 288 canonical work pages

  1. [1]

    F.Perspectives in Electronic Structure Theory; Springer Berlin Heidelberg, 2011; p 415–452

    Nalewajski, R. F.Perspectives in Electronic Structure Theory; Springer Berlin Heidelberg, 2011; p 415–452

    work page 2011

  2. [2]

    Geerlings, P.; Borgoo, A.Phys. Chem. Chem. Phys.2011,13, 911–922

    work page 2011

  3. [3]

    Ruedenberg, K.Rev. Mod. Phys.1962,34, 326–376

    work page 1962

  4. [4]

    InQuantum Theory of Atoms in Molecules–Dalton Revisited; Löwdin, P.- O., Ed.; Advances in Quantum Chemistry; Academic Press, 1981; Vol

    Bader, R.; Nguyen-Dang, T. InQuantum Theory of Atoms in Molecules–Dalton Revisited; Löwdin, P.- O., Ed.; Advances in Quantum Chemistry; Academic Press, 1981; Vol. 14; pp 63–124

    work page 1981

  5. [5]

    Cremer, D.; Kraka, E.Croatica Chemica Acta1984,57, 1259–1281

    work page

  6. [6]

    Bader, R. F. W.; MacDougall, P. J.Journal of the American Chemical Society1985,107, 6788–6795

    work page

  7. [7]

    Bader, R. F. W.Accounts of Chemical Research1985,18, 9–15

    work page

  8. [8]

    Bader, R. F. W.Chemical Reviews1991,91, 893–928

    work page

  9. [9]

    F.; Gillespie, R

    Matta, C. F.; Gillespie, R. J.Journal of Chemical Education2002,79, 1141

    work page

  10. [10]

    Bader, R. F. W.Monatshefte für Chemie - Chemical Monthly2005,136, 819–854

    work page

  11. [11]

    D.; Ayers, P

    Proft, F. D.; Ayers, P. W.; Geerlings, P.The Chemical Bond; John Wiley & Sons, Ltd, 2014; Chapter 7, pp 233–270

    work page 2014

  12. [12]

    Popelier, P. L. A.The Chemical Bond; John Wiley & Sons, Ltd, 2014; Chapter 8, pp 271–308

    work page 2014

  13. [13]

    W.; Matta, C

    Koch, D.; Pavanello, M.; Shao, X.; Ihara, M.; Ayers, P. W.; Matta, C. F.; Jenkins, S.; Manzhos, S. Chemical Reviews2024,124, 12661–12737

    work page

  14. [14]

    H.Nature1915,95, 343–344

    COMPTON, A. H.Nature1915,95, 343–344

    work page

  15. [15]

    M.; Bartell, L

    Gavin, R. M.; Bartell, L. S.The Journal of Chemical Physics1966,45, 4700–4703

    work page

  16. [16]

    D.Advances in Quantum Chemistry Volume 10; Elsevier, 1977; p 1–35

    Coppens, P.; Stevens, E. D.Advances in Quantum Chemistry Volume 10; Elsevier, 1977; p 1–35

    work page 1977

  17. [17]

    Coppens, P.Annual Review of Physical Chemistry1992,43, 663–692

    work page

  18. [18]

    G.; Ozerov, R

    Tsirelson, V. G.; Ozerov, R. P.Electron Density and Bonding in Crystals: Principles, Theory and X-ray Diffraction Experiments in Solid State Physics and Chemistry; Institute of Physics Publishing: Bristol, 1996

    work page 1996

  19. [19]

    S.; Coppens, P.Chemical Reviews2001,101, 1583–1628

    Koritsanszky, T. S.; Coppens, P.Chemical Reviews2001,101, 1583–1628

    work page

  20. [20]

    H.; Lai, B.; Hodgson, K

    Miao, J.; Ishikawa, T.; Johnson, B.; Anderson, E. H.; Lai, B.; Hodgson, K. O.Phys. Rev. Lett.2002, 89, 088303

    work page 2002

  21. [21]

    Chapman, H. N. et al.Nature2011,470, 73–77

    work page

  22. [22]

    R.; Filsø, M

    Kasai, H.; Tolborg, K.; Sist, M.; Zhang, J.; Hathwar, V. R.; Filsø, M. Ø.; Cenedese, S.; Sugimoto, K.; Overgaard, J.; Nishibori, E.; Iversen, B. B.Nature Materials2018,17, 249–252

    work page

  23. [23]

    Gao, C.; Macetti, G.; Overgaard, J.Inorganic Chemistry2019,58, 2133–2139

    work page

  24. [24]

    J.; Clever, G

    Gruene, T.; Holstein, J. J.; Clever, G. H.; Keppler, B.Nature Reviews Chemistry2021,5, 660–668

    work page

  25. [25]

    J.Reports on Progress in Physics1985,48, 415–481

    Cooper, M. J.Reports on Progress in Physics1985,48, 415–481

    work page

  26. [26]

    T.; Shiotani, N.; Mijnarends, P

    Tanaka, Y.; Sakurai, Y.; Stewart, A. T.; Shiotani, N.; Mijnarends, P. E.; Kaprzyk, S.; Bansil, A.Phys. Rev. B2001,63, 045120. 19

    work page

  27. [27]

    M.Applied Radiation and Isotopes2004,60, 805–814

    Achmad, B.; Hussein, E. M.Applied Radiation and Isotopes2004,60, 805–814

    work page

  28. [28]

    et al.Scientific Reports2016,6, 29518

    Yu, C. et al.Scientific Reports2016,6, 29518

    work page

  29. [29]

    Hiraoka, N.; Nomura, T.Scientific Reports2017,7

    work page

  30. [30]

    Feng, Z.; Zhang, X.; Sakurai, Y.; Wang, Z.; Li, H.; Hu, H.Scientific Reports2019,9

    work page

  31. [31]

    TALMANTAITE, A.; HUNT, M.; MENDIS, B.Journal of Microscopy2020,279, 185–188

    work page

  32. [32]

    Qiao, C.-K.; Wei, J.-W.; Chen, L.Crystals2021,11

    work page

  33. [33]

    T.Canadian Journal of Physics1957,35, 168–183

    Stewart, A. T.Canadian Journal of Physics1957,35, 168–183

    work page

  34. [34]

    Crystallogr

    Reed, W.Acta. Crystallogr. A1976,32, 676

    work page

  35. [35]

    J.; Saarinen, K.; Hautojärvi, P.; Nieminen, R

    Alatalo, M.; Barbiellini, B.; Hakala, M.; Kauppinen, H.; Korhonen, T.; Puska, M. J.; Saarinen, K.; Hautojärvi, P.; Nieminen, R. M.Phys. Rev. B1996,54, 2397–2409

    work page

  36. [36]

    Brusa, R.; Deng, W.; Karwasz, G.; Zecca, A.Nuclear Instruments and Methods in Physics Research Section B: Beam Interactions with Materials and Atoms2002,194, 519–531

    work page

  37. [37]

    O.; Potzger, K.; Krause-Rehberg, R.AIP Conference Proceed- ings2018,1970, 040003

    Wagner, A.; Butterling, M.; Liedke, M. O.; Potzger, K.; Krause-Rehberg, R.AIP Conference Proceed- ings2018,1970, 040003

    work page 1970

  38. [38]

    Arias-Aragón, F.; Darmé, L.; Grilli di Cortona, G.; Nardi, E.Phys. Rev. Lett.2024,132, 261801

    work page 2024

  39. [39]

    E.The Bell System Technical Journal1948,27, 379–423

    Shannon, C. E.The Bell System Technical Journal1948,27, 379–423

    work page

  40. [40]

    Jaynes, E. T.Phys. Rev.1957,106, 620–630

    work page 1957

  41. [41]

    R.Reviews of Modern Quantum Chemistry: A Celebration of the Contributions of Robert G Parr (In 2 Volumes); World Scientific, 2002; pp 108–147

    Gadre, S. R.Reviews of Modern Quantum Chemistry: A Celebration of the Contributions of Robert G Parr (In 2 Volumes); World Scientific, 2002; pp 108–147

    work page 2002

  42. [42]

    F.Information theory of molecular systems; Elsevier, 2006

    Nalewajski, R. F.Information theory of molecular systems; Elsevier, 2006

    work page 2006

  43. [43]

    Rong, C.; Wang, B.; Zhao, D.; Liu, S.WIREs Computational Molecular Science2020,10, e1461

    work page

  44. [44]

    W.Entropy2025,27

    Zhao, Y.; Zhao, D.; Rong, C.; Liu, S.; Ayers, P. W.Entropy2025,27

    work page

  45. [45]

    R.; Sears, S

    Gadre, S. R.; Sears, S. B.The Journal of Chemical Physics1979,71, 4321–4323

    work page

  46. [46]

    B.; Gadre, S

    Sears, S. B.; Gadre, S. R.The Journal of Chemical Physics1981,75, 4626–4635

    work page

  47. [47]

    R.; Bendale, R

    Gadre, S. R.; Bendale, R. D.; Gejji, S. P.Chemical Physics Letters1985,117, 138–142

    work page

  48. [48]

    G.; Rupnik, K.; Ghosh, S

    Parr, R. G.; Rupnik, K.; Ghosh, S. K.Phys. Rev. Lett.1986,56, 1555–1558

    work page 1986

  49. [49]

    F.; Smith, V

    Hô, M.; Weaver, D. F.; Smith, V. H.; Sagar, R. P.; Esquivel, R. O.Phys. Rev. A1998,57, 4512–4517

    work page

  50. [50]

    P.; Sanz-Vicario, J

    Restrepo Cuartas, J. P.; Sanz-Vicario, J. L.Phys. Rev. A2015,91, 052301

    work page

  51. [51]

    Schattschneider, P.; Löffler, S.; Gollisch, H.; Feder, R.Journal of Electron Spectroscopy and Related Phenomena2020,241, 146810, Sources, Interaction with Matter, Detection and Analysis of Low Energy Electrons (SIMDALEE2)

    work page

  52. [52]

    Lee, M.-J.; Jung, Y.-D.Entropy2020,22

    work page

  53. [53]

    C.; Di Rocco, H

    Aguiar, J. C.; Di Rocco, H. O.Physica Scripta2022,97, 045818

    work page

  54. [54]

    F.The Journal of Physical Chemistry A2000,104, 11940–11951

    Nalewajski, R. F.The Journal of Physical Chemistry A2000,104, 11940–11951

    work page

  55. [55]

    F.The Journal of Physical Chemistry A2003,107, 3792–3802

    Nalewajski, R. F.The Journal of Physical Chemistry A2003,107, 3792–3802. 20

    work page

  56. [56]

    F.Molecular Physics2004,102, 531–546

    Nalewajski, R. F.Molecular Physics2004,102, 531–546

    work page

  57. [57]

    F.Molecular Physics2004,102, 547–566

    Nalewajski, R. F.Molecular Physics2004,102, 547–566

    work page

  58. [58]

    Nalewajski, R. F. InApplications of Density Functional Theory to Chemical Reactivity; Putz, M. V., Mingos, D. M. P., Eds.; Springer Berlin Heidelberg: Berlin, Heidelberg, 2012; pp 51–93

    work page 2012

  59. [59]

    K.; Liu, S.The Journal of Physical Chemistry A2019,123, 6751–6760

    Wu, J.; Yu, D.; Liu, S.; Rong, C.; Zhong, A.; Chattaraj, P. K.; Liu, S.The Journal of Physical Chemistry A2019,123, 6751–6760

    work page

  60. [60]

    K.The Journal of Physical Chemistry A2022,126, 6801–6813

    Pal, R.; Poddar, A.; Chattaraj, P. K.The Journal of Physical Chemistry A2022,126, 6801–6813

    work page

  61. [61]

    F.International Journal of Molecular Sciences2002,3, 237–259

    Nalewajski, R. F.International Journal of Molecular Sciences2002,3, 237–259

    work page

  62. [62]

    F.; Świtka, E.Phys

    Nalewajski, R. F.; Świtka, E.Phys. Chem. Chem. Phys.2002,4, 4952–4958

    work page 2002

  63. [63]

    O.; Flores-Gallegos, N.; Iuga, C.; Carrera, E

    Esquivel, R. O.; Flores-Gallegos, N.; Iuga, C.; Carrera, E. M.; Angulo, J. C.; Antolín, J.Theoretical Chemistry Accounts2009,124, 445–460

    work page

  64. [64]

    The Journal of Physical Chemistry A2010,114, 1906–1916

    Esquivel,R.O.; Flores-Gallegos,N.; Dehesa,J.S.; Angulo,J.C.; Antolín,J.; López-Rosa,S.; Sen,K.D. The Journal of Physical Chemistry A2010,114, 1906–1916

    work page 1906

  65. [65]

    A.; Balawender, R.; Holas, A.Phys

    Welearegay, M. A.; Balawender, R.; Holas, A.Phys. Chem. Chem. Phys.2014,16, 14928–14946

    work page 2014

  66. [66]

    a.Acta Physico-Chimica Sinica2016,32, 98–118

    LIU, S.-B. a.Acta Physico-Chimica Sinica2016,32, 98–118

    work page

  67. [67]

    Flores-Gallegos, N.Journal of Mathematical Chemistry2022,60, 1405–1421

    work page

  68. [68]

    Flores-Gallegos, N.; G-Damián, O.Journal of Mathematical Chemistry2023,62, 300–311

    work page

  69. [69]

    Lin, S.-K.Journal of Chemical Information and Computer Sciences1996,36, 367–376

    work page

  70. [70]

    F.; Gatti, C.; Sagar, R

    Hô, M.; Smith, J., Vedene H.; Weaver, D. F.; Gatti, C.; Sagar, R. P.; Esquivel, R. O.The Journal of Chemical Physics1998,108, 5469–5475

    work page

  71. [71]

    F.; Parr, R

    Nalewajski, R. F.; Parr, R. G.Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences2000,97, 8879–8882

    work page

  72. [72]

    W.; Stahura, F

    Godden, J. W.; Stahura, F. L.; Bajorath, J.Journal of Chemical Information and Computer Sciences 2000,40, 796–800

    work page 2000

  73. [73]

    F.; Parr, R

    Nalewajski, R. F.; Parr, R. G.The Journal of Physical Chemistry A2001,105, 7391–7400

    work page

  74. [74]

    Flores-Gallegos, N.Journal of Mathematical Chemistry2021,60, 239–254

    work page

  75. [75]

    Flores-Gómez, L.; Flores-Gallegos, N.Journal of Mathematical Chemistry2024,63, 73–95

    work page

  76. [76]

    Löwdin, P. O.Adv. Chem. Phys.; John Wiley & Sons, Ltd, 1958; pp 207–322

    work page 1958

  77. [77]

    Rev.1934,46, 1002–1011

    Wigner, E.Phys. Rev.1934,46, 1002–1011

    work page 1934

  78. [78]

    Collins, D. M.Z. Naturforsch. A1993,48, 68–74

    work page

  79. [79]

    P.; Pérez-Jordá, J

    Hô, M.; Sagar, R. P.; Pérez-Jordá, J. M.; Smith, V. H.; Esquivel, R. O.Chem. Phys. Lett.1994,219, 15–20

    work page 1994

  80. [80]

    Löwdin, P. O.Int. J. Quantum Chem.1995,55, 77–102

    work page 1995

Showing first 80 references.