Concerted Proton-Transfer Mechanism and Solvation Effects in the HNC/HCN Isomerization on the Surface of Icy Grain Mantles in the Interstellar Medium
Bibliographic record
Abstract
In order to better understand the isomerization between HNC and HCN on icy grain (or comet nuclei) surfaces in the interstellar medium in connection with a Strecker synthesis route to glycine, B3LYP/6-31+G(d,p) calculations have been carried out on the mechanisms of direct proton transfer (PT), where water molecules play a purely solvating role, and indirect PT, where water molecules participate in a proton relay mechanism. In the direct PT mechanism, a rather high-energy barrier exists for isomerization of HNC to HCN. In the much more important indirect mechanism, a concerted PT process is possible for isomerization in the presence of several water molecules. The calculations show that three water molecules bound to HNC and HCN give rise to a ring reaction significantly favoring the isomerization, a mechanism previously found for this reaction by Gardebien and Sevin ( J. Phys. Chem. A 2003, 107, 3925). Further quite important solvation effects are included in the present work by addition of explicit solvating water molecules, and by a comparison with Polarizable Continuum Model (PCM) solvation. The final calculated free-energy barrier at 50 K is 3.4 kcal/mol for the isomerization of HNC to HCN with three water molecules in a ring acting as a bridge for concerted PT and seven explicit solvating water molecules; PCM solvation of this entire system leads to a further free-energy barrier reduction of 0.8 kcal/mol. The back isomerization of HCN to HNC, however, is unlikely, with an estimated free-energy barrier of 9.5 kcal/mol at 50 K. These results imply that, on icy surfaces in the interstellar medium, the isomerization of HNC to HCN occurs relatively easily, and the implications for the Strecker synthesis of glycine are discussed.
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) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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".