MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1974775330 · doi:10.1063/1.1897374

An elementary derivation of the hard/soft-acid/base principle

2005· article· en· W1974775330 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 Chemical Physics · 2005
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldChemistry
TopicVarious Chemistry Research Topics
Canadian institutionsMcMaster University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsHSAB theoryExothermic reactionSimple (philosophy)ChemistryCharacter (mathematics)Base (topology)Product (mathematics)Computational chemistryMathematicsOrganic chemistryEpistemologyPhilosophy

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The hard/soft-acid/base (HSAB) principle indicates that hard acids prefer binding to hard bases (often forming bonds with substantial ionic character) while soft acids prefer binding to soft bases (often forming bonds with substantial covalent character). Though the HSAB principle is a foundational concept of the modern theory of acids and bases, the theoretical underpinnings of the HSAB principle remain murky. This paper examines the exchange reaction, wherein two molecules, one the product of reacting a hard acid and a soft base and the other the product of reacting a soft acid with a hard base, exchange substituents to form the preferred hard-hard and soft-soft product. A simple derivation shows that this reaction is exothermic, proving the validity of the HSAB principle. The analysis leads to the simple and conceptually appealing conclusion that the HSAB principle is a driven by simple electron transfer effects.

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)0.000
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 score0.006
Threshold uncertainty score0.314

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
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 science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
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 head0.023
GPT teacher head0.291
Teacher spread0.268 · 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