MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1988080311 · doi:10.1139/v05-233

Ab initio study of the decomposition of formamidine

2005· article· en· W1988080311 on OpenAlexfundvenueno aff
Mansour H. Almatarneh, Christopher G. Flinn, Raymond A. Poirier

Bibliographic record

VenueCanadian Journal of Chemistry · 2005
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldChemistry
TopicChemical Reaction Mechanisms
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of CanadaMemorial University of Newfoundland
KeywordsChemistryDecompositionTransition stateMoleculeAb initioActivation barrierReaction coordinateActivation energyChemical decompositionTransition state theoryPhysical chemistryComputational chemistryAmmoniaStandard enthalpy of formationAb initio quantum chemistry methodsHydrogenYield (engineering)ThermodynamicsReaction rate constantDensity functional theoryKineticsOrganic chemistryCatalysis

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The decomposition of formamidine yielding hydrogen cyanide and ammonia has been investigated by ab initio calculations. Optimized geometries for reactants, transition states, and products were determined at the HF/6-31G(d) and MP2/6-31G(d) levels of theory. Energies were also determined at the G1, G2, G2MP2, G3, G3B3, G3MP2, and G3MP2B3 levels of theory. The role of water in the decomposition reaction of formamidine was examined. Intrinsic reaction coordinate (IRC) analysis was carried out for all transition states. Activation energies, enthalpies and free energies of activation were also calculated for each reaction pathway. G3 level of theory predicts the gas-phase decomposition of formamidine to have a high activation energy of 259.1 kJ mol –1 . Adding one water molecule catalyses the reaction by forming a cyclic hydrogen-bonded transition state, reducing the barrier to 169.4 kJ mol –1 at the G3 level. Addition of a second water, which acts as a "solvent" molecule, further reduces the barrier to 151.1 kJ mol –1 at the G3 level. These values are still high and explain why rather extreme conditions are necessary to achieve this reaction experimentally. Thermodynamic properties (ΔE, ΔH, and ΔG) for each reaction pathway studied were also calculated. The G3 heats of reaction (ΔE) of the gas-phase decomposition of formamidine, its complex with one water molecule, and its complex with two water molecules are 0.9, 2.2, and –5.1 kJ mol –1 , respectively. The G3 heat of reaction for the gas-phase decomposition to yield separated products is 22.3 kJ mol –1 . Free energies of reaction and of activation in aqueous solution were calculated with PCM using the KLAMT cavity model. At MP2 the formamidine reaction is found to be exergonic in aqueous solution and to favour formation of the separated products (NH 3 + HCN). The solvent model predicts a significant lowering of the free energy of activation (16–18 kJ mol –1 ) for the unimolecular reaction and 21–42 kJ mol –1 for the water-mediated reaction in aqueous solution relative to the gas phase. Key words: decomposition reaction, formamidine, Hartree–Fock, post Hartree–Fock, Gaussian-n theories, IRC, solvation models, PCM, KLAMT.

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: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.019
Threshold uncertainty score0.038

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0020.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.001

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 head0.011
GPT teacher head0.236
Teacher spread0.226 · 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 designSimulation or modeling
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

Citations24
Published2005
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCanadian Journal of ChemistrySame topicChemical Reaction MechanismsFrench-language works237,207