Ion-pairing in aqueous CaCl2 and RbBr solutions: Simultaneous structural refinement of XAFS and XRD data
Bibliographic record
Abstract
We present a new methodology involving the simultaneous refinement of both x-ray absorption and x-ray diffraction spectra (x-ray absorption∕diffraction structural refinement, XADSR) to study the hydration and ion pair structure of CaCl(2) and RbBr salts in concentrated aqueous solutions. The XADSR method combines the x-ray absorption fine structure (XAFS) spectral analysis of both the cation and anion as a probe of their short-range structure with an x-ray diffraction (XRD) spectral analysis as a probe of the global structural. Together they deliver a comprehensive picture of the cation and anion hydration, the contact ion pair (CIP) structure, and the solvent-separated ion pair (SSIP) structure. XADSR analysis of 6.0 m aqueous CaCl(2) reveals that there are ~0.26 Ca(2+)-Cl(-) CIP's separated by about 2.71 Å, while there are 3.4 SSIP's separated by about 4.98 Å. In contrast XADSR analysis of 6 m aqueous RbBr yields about 0.7 pair CIP at a bond length of 3.51 Å. The present work demonstrates a new approach for a direct co-refinement of XRD and XAFS spectra in a simple and reliable fashion, opening new opportunities for analysis in various disordered and crystalline systems.
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 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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".