The Geometry of Nonmetal Hydrides and the Ligand Radius of Hydrogen
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The aim of this paper was to investigate why the geometries of nonmetal hydrides are often not in accordance with the VSEPR model. From a consideration of interligand distances in a variety of BX(4), CX(4), and NX(4) molecules where X is a ligand or a lone pair and in which there are at least two H ligands we have shown that the hydrogen ligands are essentially close-packed. For each of the central atoms we have obtained a value for the ligand radius of hydrogen. These radii decrease with decreasing negative charge and increasing positive charge of the hydrogen ligand as the electronegativity of the central atom increases, as has been found previously for other ligands such as F and Cl. We show that ligand-ligand intractions are an important factor in determining bond angles in hydrides and that the ligand close-packing (LCP) model gives a better explanation of bond angles than the VSEPR model according to which bond angles depend on the electronegativity of the ligand rather than on its size. For example, although the very small angles in PH(3) and SH(2) are not in accord with the VSEPR model, they are consistent with the LCP model in that they are a consequence of the small size of hydrogen ligands which are pushed together by the lone pairs until they are almost close-packed.
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 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 | 0.000 | 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 | 0.000 |
| 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 itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, 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".