Interpretation of Indirect Nuclear Spin−Spin Coupling Tensors for Polyatomic Xenon Fluorides and Group 17 Fluorides: Results from Relativistic Density-Functional Calculations
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Significant improvements have been made recently in the calculation of NMR indirect nuclear spin-spin coupling tensors (J). In particular, the relativistic zeroth-order regular approximation density-functional theory (ZORA-DFT) approach holds great promise for the calculation of spin-spin coupling constants for a variety of chemical systems containing heavy nuclei. In the present work, the ZORA-DFT method is applied to the calculation of the complete reduced coupling tensors, K, for a range of chlorine-, bromine-, iodine-, and xenon-containing species: K(Cl,F) for ClF(2)(+), ClF(3), ClF(4)(+), ClF(5), ClF(6)(-), and ClF(6)(+); K(Br,F) for BrF(3), BrF(6)(-), and BrF(6)(+); K(I,F) for IF(4)(+) and IF(6)(+); K(Xe,F) for XeF(+), XeF(2), XeF(3)(+), XeF(4), XeF(5)(-), XeF(5)(+), and XeF(7)(+). These species represent a wide variety of geometrical bonding arrangements. Agreement between the calculated coupling constants and available experimental data is excellent, and the absolute sign of the coupling constants is provided. It is shown that (1)K(iso) may be positive or negative even within the same molecule, e.g., K(Cl,F)(iso) may be of either sign, depending on the local environment. Periodic trends in (1)K(iso) for isovalent and isostructural molecules are evident. The spin-spin coupling anisotropies, Delta K, and the orientations of the K tensors are also determined. The success of the calculations is a direct result of employing reliable geometries and considering both scalar and spin-orbit relativistic effects. The dependence of K(Cl,F)(iso) and K(Xe,F)(iso) on the local molecular and electronic structure is discussed in terms of the paramagnetic spin-orbit (PSO) and combined Fermi-contact spin-dipolar (FC+SD) coupling mechanisms. The PSO term depends strongly on the number of valence shell electron lone pairs on the central heavy atom, and the FC+SD contribution increases with the Cl[bond]F or Xe[bond]F bond length for a given series of compounds. This interpretation allows for the successful rationalization of the existing experimental data.
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) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.004 | 0.001 |
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.
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".