Revised values of the bond valence parameters for <sup>[6]</sup>Sb(V)–O and <sup>[3–11]</sup>Sb(III)–O
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract Bond valence parameters r 0 and b have been re-determined for [3–11] Sb(III)–O and [6] Sb(V)–O, utilising crystal structures of natural and inorganic compounds from the Inorganic Crystal Structure Database. Bond valence parameters for Sb(III) were obtained from a best-fit r 0 – b curve for 242 independent SbO n polyhedra. For [6] Sb(V), a curve of best fitting r 0 – b pairs was determined by fitting to 207 independent SbO 6 octahedra; b was then determined by optimising bond valence sums on the oxygens of Sb 2 O 5 and Sb 2 O 4 , given the limited low quality structural data available for Sb(V) coordination numbers other than 6. Parameter values that minimised r.m.s. deviation from the ideal bond valence sums were r 0 = 1.925 Å and b = 0.455 Å for Sb(III) and r 0 = 1.904 Å, b = 0.430 Å for [6] Sb(V). The increase in r 0 for Sb(III) may represent the repulsive effect of the lone-pair electrons, while the difference in b indicates higher polarisability when these electrons are present. Consideration of subsets of data for differing coordination numbers demonstrates that Sb(III) parameters are applicable to all SbO n coordination numbers (CN = 3–11). We also show that the apparent overbonding using the classical b value cannot be an artefact of unresolved site splitting. For Sb(V), independent determination of b allows bond lengths cautiously to be estimated for CN ≠ 6. This work confirms that the “universal” value b = 0.37 Å is not adequate for heavier cations such as Sb.
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.
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 it