Theoretical Study of the Oxygen Exchange in Uranyl Hydroxide. An Old Riddle Solved?
Bibliographic record
Abstract
A multistep mechanism for the experimentally observed oxygen exchange [Inorg. Chem. 1999, 38, 1456] of UO2(2+) cations in highly alkaline solutions is suggested and probed computationally. It involves an equilibrium between [UO2(OH)4](2-) and [UO2(OH)5](3-), followed by formation of the stable [UO3(OH)3 x H2O](3-) intermediate that forms from [UO2(OH)5](3-) through intramolecular water elimination. The [UO3(OH)3 x H2O](3-) intermediate facilitates oxygen exchange through proton shuttling, retaining trans-uranyl structures throughout, without formation of the cis-uranyl intermediates proposed earliar. Alternative cis-uranyl pathways have been explored but were found to have activation energies that are too high. Relativistic density functional theory (DFT) has been applied to obtain geometries and vibrational frequencies of the different species (reactants, intermediates, transition states, products) and to calculate reaction paths. Two different relativistic methods were used: a scalar four-component all-electron relativistic method and the zeroeth-order regular approximation. Calculations were conducted for both gas phase and condensed phase, the latter treated using the COSMO continuum model. An activation energy of 12.5 kcal/mol is found in solution for the rate-determining step, the reaction of changing the four-coordinated uranyl hydroxide to the five-coordinated one. This compares favorably to the experimental value of 9.8 +/- 0.7 kcal/mol. Activation energies of 7.8 and 5.1 kcal/mol are found for the hydrogen transfer between equatorial and axial oxygens through a water molecule in [UO3(OH)3 x H2O](3-) in the gas phase and condensed phase, respectively. Contrary to previously proposed mechanisms that resulted in high activation barriers, we find energies that are low enough to facilitate the reaction at room temperature. For the activation energies, two approximate DFT methods, B3LYP and PBE, are compared. The differences in activation energies are only about 1-2 kcal/mol for these methods.
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 | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 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 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".