MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1520209841 · doi:10.1002/0470027320.s4101

Spectra– Structure Correlations in the Mid‐ and Far‐Infrared

2001· other· en· W1520209841 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueHandbook of Vibrational Spectroscopy · 2001
Typeother
Languageen
FieldChemistry
TopicSpectroscopy and Chemometric Analyses
Canadian institutionsQueen's University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsInfrared spectroscopyInfraredSpectral lineMoleculeGroup (periodic table)Spectrum (functional analysis)ChemistryAbsorption spectroscopyComputational chemistryPhysicsOpticsOrganic chemistryQuantum mechanics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract A rapid and simple method for obtaining preliminary information on the identity or structure of an organic molecule is to record an infrared absorption spectrum of the compound. Infrared spectroscopy gives information on molecular structure through the frequencies of vibrations of the molecule. From knowledge of group frequencies, direct information about the presence (or absence) of certain functional groups in an unknown compound is available from an infrared spectrum. Comparison of the spectrum of an unknown material with the spectra of known compounds can lead to the identification of the unknown substance. This section concentrates on spectra–structure correlations in the mid‐ and far‐infrared. An introduction to group frequencies and factors affecting them is given. Tables of group frequencies are provided and a systematic method for the analysis of a spectrum is presented. Examples on the use of spectra–structure correlations are given. A bibliography of the methods and references to collections of spectra are included.

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.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow), Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: Bench or experimental
GenreCandidate signal: Other · Consensus signal: Other
Teacher disagreement score0.318
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0350.000

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 head0.010
GPT teacher head0.258
Teacher spread0.248 · 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