MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2016687058 · doi:10.1063/1.2823130

Observable effects of mechanical stress induced by sample spinning in solid state nuclear magnetic resonance

2008· article· en· W2016687058 on OpenAlexafffund
M. Jochum, Ulrike Werner‐Zwanziger, Josef W. Zwanziger

Bibliographic record

VenueThe Journal of Chemical Physics · 2008
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldChemistry
TopicAdvanced NMR Techniques and Applications
Canadian institutionsDalhousie University
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of CanadaCanada Research Chairs
KeywordsStress (linguistics)Materials scienceElectromagnetic shieldingCondensed matter physicsIsothermal processRelaxation (psychology)Nuclear magnetic resonanceChemistryThermodynamicsComposite materialPhysics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The stress-induced change in chemical shielding induced by sample spinning is measured and interpreted theoretically. By considering the rotating sample as an elastic body in the plane-strain approximation, the internal stress field as a function of sample size, rotation frequency, and elastic constants is determined. This stress field and the dependence of chemical shielding on strain, as determined by first-principles calculations, are combined to predict the shielding dependence on rotation frequency under isothermal conditions in single crystal gallium phosphide. The prediction is in good qualitative agreement with the experiment. Little to no effect is detected in powder samples of both gallium phosphide and copper iodide, and it is argued that this follows from the stress distribution in granular material, as opposed to bulk crystals. Finally, the temperature and pressure dependence of the chemical shielding is estimated from these considerations and found consistently to underestimate the experimental values, indicating the importance of finite-temperature anharmonic effects even in very simple solids.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation 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 score0.013
Threshold uncertainty score0.354

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.017
GPT teacher head0.266
Teacher spread0.248 · 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 teacher head, 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

Citations13
Published2008
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueThe Journal of Chemical PhysicsSame topicAdvanced NMR Techniques and ApplicationsFrench-language works237,207