MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1971828524 · doi:10.1021/jp056996n

Evaluation of Effective Core Potentials and Basis Sets for the Prediction of the Geometries of Alkyltin Halides

2006· article· en· W1971828524 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

VenueThe Journal of Physical Chemistry A · 2006
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldChemistry
TopicOrganometallic Compounds Synthesis and Characterization
Canadian institutionsDalhousie University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsBasis setBasis (linear algebra)HalideCore (optical fiber)Set (abstract data type)TinGas phaseChemistryComputational chemistryDensity functional theoryMaterials scienceMathematicsPhysical chemistryComputer scienceGeometryOrganic chemistryComposite material

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

A systematic comparison of the optimized geometries of five organotin compounds, Cl(n)Sn(CH(3))(4-n), n = 0-4, with the available gas-phase electron diffraction results is reported. All optimizations were carried out with the B3LYP density functional method. Comparison of 10 basis sets and three effective core potentials leads to the conclusion that the combination of the SDB-aug-cc-pVTZ basis set and the LANL2 effective core potential for tin, together with the 6-31G(d,p) basis set for the other atoms, is recommended for the prediction of the geometries of organotin compounds.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: Bench or experimental
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.020
Threshold uncertainty score0.177

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.021
GPT teacher head0.257
Teacher spread0.237 · 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