Nuclear spin–spin coupling constants from regular approximate relativistic density functional calculations. II. Spin–orbit coupling effects and anisotropies
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.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Based on our recently published two-component relativistic formulation of the nuclear spin–spin coupling hyperfine terms, we present a full implementation into the Amsterdam Density Functional program. The scalar relativistic code has been extended to include the relativistic analogue of the spin–dipole operator in the coupling calculations, which can now in addition be based on two-component spin–orbit coupled Kohn–Sham orbitals. One-bond coupling constants for some plumbanes are in good agreement with experiment, slightly improving the scalar relativistic values. Coupling constants and anisotropies for the XF (X=Cl, Br, I) and TlX (X=F, Cl, Br, I) series are compared to experimental data and for ClF additionally to recently published ab initio calculations. The spin–dipole term contributes largely to the coupling constants in XF. Spin–orbit effects are essential for the TlX couplings, where they can yield the most important contributions. In addition, data is reported for the benchmark systems ethane, ethene, and ethyne.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| 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 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it