Density functional theory for N–NO<sub>2</sub> bond dissociation energies of <i>N</i>-nitroacylamide compounds in acetonitrile — Theoretical method assessment and prediction
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The performance of various density functional theories (B3LYP, B3PW91, B3P86, B1LYP, BMK, MPWB1K, PBE0, and MPWB95) was examined for calculating N–NO2 bond dissociation energies (BDEs) of 10 N-nitroacylamide compounds. The CBS-4M method was also used. By comparing the calculated results with the experimental values, it was observed that B1LYP/6–31G** and B3LYP/6–31+G** provided accurate BDEs. Especially, B3LYP/6–31+G** was recommended because of its smaller maximum absolute deviation. Further, substituent effects based on the B3LYP/6–31+G** method were analyzed. The result shows that an electron-donating group increases the BDE of the parent C6H5–CON(CH3)NO2, while an electron-withdrawing group decreases the BDE of the parent C6H5–CON(CH3)NO2. Subsequently, the BDEs of the other N-nitroacylamindes were estimated.
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 | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 0.001 |
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".