New results for the formation of a muoniated radical in the Mu + Br2 system: a van der Waals complex or evidence for vibrational bonding in Br–Mu–Br?
Bibliographic record
Abstract
New evidence is presented for the observation of a muoniated radical in the Mu + Br(2) system, from μSR longitudinal field (LF) repolarisation studies in the gas phase, at Br(2) concentrations of 0.1 bar in a Br(2)/N(2) mixture at 300 K and at 10 bar total pressure. The LF repolarisation curve, up to a field of 4.5 kG, reveals two paramagnetic components, one for the Mu atom, formed promptly during the slowing-down process of the positive muon, with a known Mu hyperfine coupling constant (hfcc) of 4463 MHz, and one for a muoniated radical formed by fast Mu addition. From model fits to the Br(2)/N(2) data, the radical component is found to have an unusually high muon hfcc, assessed to be ∼3300 MHz with an overall error due to systematics expected to exceed 10%. This high muon hfcc is taken as evidence for the observation of either the Br-Mu-Br radical, and hence of vibrational bonding in this H[combining low line]-L[combining low line]-H[combining low line] system, or of a MuBr(2) van der Waals complex formed in the entrance channel. Preliminary ab initio electronic structure calculations suggest the latter is more likely but fully rigorous calculations of the effect of dynamics on the hfcc for either system have yet to be carried out.
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) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.004 | 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".