Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract Noble‐gas reactivity was discovered in 1962 when Neil Bartlett showed that xenon gas was oxidized by PtF6to XePtF6. Pursuant to his discovery, numerous xenon and krypton compounds were synthesized in macroscopic quantities. Among the noble‐gas elements, xenon has the most extensive chemistry, and can possess formal oxidation states of 0, +½, +2, +4, +6 and +8 in its compounds by forming fluorides, oxides and oxide fluorides as well as derivatives in which xenon is bonded to polyatomic groups through oxygen, nitrogen and carbon. In addition, several compounds containing Xe‐Au bonds and one compound containing an Xe‐Xe bond are known. Other xenon‐element bonds are known in the gas phase or in low‐temperature matrices, which provide examples of Xe‐H, Xe‐Si, Xe‐S, Xe‐X (X = Cl, Br, I) and Xe‐U bonds. Krypton chemistry is more limited. Only compounds with krypton in the +2 oxidation state are known, namely, KrF2, salts of the KrF+and Kr2F3+cations, by analogy with xenon, Kr(OTeF5)2and several species containing Kr‐N bonds. Several gas‐phase and matrix‐isolated species in which krypton is bonded to carbon, hydrogen and halides other than fluorine are also known. Radon is believed to form RnF2and RnF+by analogy with krypton and xenon. The only argon species that are known are the ArF+cation, which has been observed in the gas phase, and HArF, which has been stabilized in a low‐temperature argon matrix. To date, no argon, neon or helium compounds have been isolated in macroscopic amounts. Noble‐gas compounds have been utilized as oxidizers and oxidative fluorinating agents in chemical syntheses.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.043 | 0.015 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".