Modeling the interactions between peptide functions and Sr2+: formamide–Sr2+ reactions in the gas phase
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The interactions between formamide, which can be considered a prototype of a peptide function, and Sr(2+) have been investigated by combining nanoelectrospray ionization/mass spectrometry techniques and G96LYP DFT calculations. For Sr an extended LANL2DZ basis set was employed, together with a 6-311+G(3df,2p) basis set expansion for the remaining atoms of the system. The observed reactivity seems to be dominated by the Coulomb explosion process yielding [SrOH](+) + [HNCH](+), which are the most intense peaks in the MS/MS spectra. Nevertheless, additional peaks corresponding to the loss of HNC and CO indicate that the association of Sr(2+) to water or to ammonia leads to long-lived doubly charged species detectable in the timescale of these experimental techniques. The topology of the calculated potential energy surface permits us to establish the mechanisms behind these processes. Although the interaction between the neutral base and Sr(2+) is essentially electrostatic, the polarization triggered by the doubly charged metal ion results in the activation of several bonds, and favors different proton transfer mechanisms required for the formation of the [SrOH](+), [SrOH(2)](2+) and [SrNH(3)](2+) products.
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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| 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".