MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W1984129730 · doi:10.1103/physrevlett.94.025502

Ordering of Hydrogen Bonds in High-Pressure Low-Temperature<mml:math xmlns:mml="http://www.w3.org/1998/Math/MathML" display="inline"><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">H</mml:mi><mml:mn>2</mml:mn></mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">O</mml:mi></mml:math>

2005· article· lv· W1984129730 on OpenAlexaff
Yong Q. Cai, H. K. Mao, Paul Chow, John S. Tse, Yanming Ma, S. Patchkovskii, Jinfu Shu, Viktor V. Struzhkin, Russell J. Hemley, Hirofumi Ishii, C. C. Chen, Ignace Jarrige, C. T. Chen, S. R. Shieh, E.P. Huang, C.-C. Kao

Bibliographic record

VenuePhysical Review Letters · 2005
Typearticle
Languagelv
FieldEarth and Planetary Sciences
TopicHigh-pressure geophysics and materials
Canadian institutionsSteacie Institute for Molecular Sciences
Fundersnot available
KeywordsHydrogen bondPhysicsInelastic neutron scatteringCrystallographyMaterials scienceScatteringChemistryInelastic scatteringMoleculeQuantum mechanics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The near K-edge structure of oxygen in liquid water and ices III, II, and IX at 0.25 GPa and several low temperatures down to 4 K has been studied using inelastic x-ray scattering at 9884.7 eV with a total energy resolution of 305 and 175 meV. A marked decrease of the preedge intensity from the liquid phase and ice III to ices II and IX is attributed to ordering of the hydrogen bonds in the proton-ordered lattice of the latter phases. Density functional theory calculations including the influence of the Madelung potential of the ice IX crystal correctly account for the remaining preedge feature. Furthermore, we obtain spectroscopic evidence suggesting a possible new phase of ice at temperatures between 4 and 50 K.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation 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 score0.003
Threshold uncertainty score0.011

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

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 science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.000

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 head0.010
GPT teacher head0.223
Teacher spread0.213 · 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 designBench or experimental
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

Citations95
Published2005
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuePhysical Review Letters→Same topicHigh-pressure geophysics and materials→French-language works237,207→