Investigation of Magnetic Shielding in Xenon Difluoride Using Solid-State NMR Spectroscopy and Relativistic Density Functional Theory
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The xenon and fluorine magnetic shielding tensors, σ, of XeF 2 are characterized using solid-state 129 Xe and 19 F NMR spectroscopy and nonrelativistic and spin−orbit relativistic zeroth-order regular approximation density functional theory (ZORA DFT). Analysis of 129 Xe and 19 F NMR spectra acquired with magic-angle spinning at several spinning rates indicates that the Xe and F magnetic shielding tensors are axially symmetric, as dictated by the crystal symmetry. The isotropic 129 Xe chemical shift is −1603 ± 5 ppm with respect to OXeF 4 (neat liquid, 24 °C) and the Xe magnetic shielding anisotropy, Ω, is 4245 ± 20 ppm, the first anisotropy measured directly for a xenon compound. The parallel component of the experimentally determined xenon chemical shift tensor, δ ∥ = −4433 ppm differs from δ(Xe(free atom)) by ∼1000 ppm, providing the first experimental demonstration that relativistic effects play an important role in the nuclear magnetic shielding for xenon. Both the sign and magnitude of the isotropic indirect 129 Xe, 19 F nuclear spin−spin coupling constant are determined, −5560 ± 50 Hz. Analysis of the 19 F NMR spectra yield Ω(F) = 150 ± 20 ppm. The ZORA DFT method has been employed to calculate σ(Xe) and σ(F) for isolated XeF 2 and XeF 4 molecules, as well as σ(Kr) and σ(F) for an isolated KrF 2 molecule, at the relativistic and nonrelativistic levels of theory. Spin−orbit relativistic DFT results for Ω(Xe) are in very good agreement with those determined experimentally and highlight the importance of relativistic effects.
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 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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".