MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2003079467 · doi:10.1021/jp809404u

Three Products Are Better than Two: Entropic Advantages in the Competing Dissociation Reactions of Ionized Azo-<i>t</i>-butane

2009· article· en· W2003079467 on OpenAlexaff
Madlena Rabaev, Anne-Marie Boulanger, D.M.P. Holland, D A Shaw, P. Mayer

Bibliographic record

VenueThe Journal of Physical Chemistry A · 2009
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPhysics and Astronomy
TopicAdvanced Chemical Physics Studies
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Ottawa
Fundersnot available
KeywordsChemistryDissociation (chemistry)ButaneIonizationMass spectrometryTransition stateAb initioIsomerizationSpectroscopyIonPhotochemistryComputational chemistryPhysical chemistryOrganic chemistryCatalysisPhysics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Ionized azo-t-butane (m/z 142) undergoes three dissociation reactions: competitive cleavage of the N-C bond to form (1) the t-butyl cation ((CH(3))(3)C(+), m/z 57) plus a neutral that is nominally (CH(3))(3)CN(2)(*) (85 Da); (2) m/z 85 cation, (CH(3))(3)CN(2)(+), plus the neutral t-butyl radical; and (3) a minor rearrangement reaction leading to ionized butene. The competition between channels (1) and (2) is governed by both energetic and entropic considerations as the 85 Da neutral lies in a 1 kJ mol(-1) potential energy well and when formed dissociates into the t-butyl radical and N(2). This gives channel 1 an entropic advantage over channel 2, as long as the transition states for these processes reside close to products, a conclusion supported by threshold photoelectron photoion coincidence spectroscopy, tandem mass spectrometry, and ab initio calculations.

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)0.002
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: Bench or experimental
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.007
Threshold uncertainty score0.023

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0020.003
Open science0.0010.002
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0070.001

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 head0.008
GPT teacher head0.260
Teacher spread0.252 · 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 designBench or experimental
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

Citations5
Published2009
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueThe Journal of Physical Chemistry ASame topicAdvanced Chemical Physics StudiesFrench-language works237,207