MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1974931722 · doi:10.1021/jp075460u

Bond Orbitals from Chemical Valence Theory

2008· article· en· W1974931722 on OpenAlexaff
Artur Michalak, Mariusz P. Mitoraj, Tom Ziegler

Bibliographic record

VenueThe Journal of Physical Chemistry A · 2008
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldChemistry
TopicChemical Thermodynamics and Molecular Structure
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Calgary
Fundersnot available
KeywordsModern valence bond theoryValence bond theoryOrbital hybridisationMolecular orbital theoryGeneralized valence bondChemical bondValence (chemistry)ChemistryLinear combination of atomic orbitalsSTO-nG basis setsBasis setPhysicsMolecular orbitalComputational chemistryQuantum mechanicsDensity functional theoryMolecule

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Two sets of orbitals are derived, directly connected to the Nalewajski-Mrozek valence and bond-multiplicity indices: Localized Orbitals from the Bond-Multiplicity Operator (LOBO) and the Natural Orbitals for Chemical Valence (NOCV). LOBO are defined as the eigenvectors of the bond-multiplicity operator. The expectation value of this operator is the corresponding bond index. Thus, the approach presented here allows for a discussion of localized orbitals and bond multiplicity within one common framework of chemical valence theory. Another set of orbitals discussed in the present work, NOCV, are defined as eigenvectors of the overall chemical valence operator. This set of orbitals can be especially useful for a description of bonding in transition metal complexes, as it allows for separation of the deformation density contributions originating from the ligand --> metal donation and metal --> ligand back-donation.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: Theoretical or conceptual
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.008
Threshold uncertainty score0.026

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0020.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0020.002
Open science0.0010.002
Research integrity0.0010.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0080.002

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 head0.006
GPT teacher head0.212
Teacher spread0.206 · 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

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designTheoretical or conceptual
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations696
Published2008
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueThe Journal of Physical Chemistry ASame topicChemical Thermodynamics and Molecular StructureFrench-language works237,207