The Hydrated Electron as a Pseudo-Atom in Cavity-Bound Water Clusters
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Anionic water clusters, (H2O)n(-), of various sizes, n = 1-8, have been investigated using high-level ab initio calculations and the quantum theory of atoms in molecules, which provides a topological analysis of the electron density. The results of the current study indicate that the distribution of the excess electron is dependent on the geometry of the cluster. Non-nuclear attractors (NNAs), with associated pseudo-atomic basins and populations, are observed only in the highly symmetric clusters in which several non-hydrogen-bonded (NHB) hydrogen atoms are oriented toward a central cavity. For the latter cases, the non-nuclear attractor can be considered a pseudo-atom, possessing a significant portion of the excess electron within the cavity, consistent with the cavity-bound model of the solvated electron. In some cases, the population of the NNA is more than 0.2 electrons, and it contributes in excess of 20 kJ/mol to the energy of the system. Furthermore, the less symmetric systems, which tend to orient the NHB hydrogen atoms away from the center of the cluster, tend to delocalize the excess electron to a greater extent over several atoms at the surface of the cluster, consistent with the surface-bound model of the excess electron.
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 | 0.001 |
| 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".