Conformations and Energetics of Sulfur and Selenium Diimides
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The geometries and energetics of different conformations of sulfur and selenium diimides E(NR)(2) (E = S, Se; R = H, Me, (t)Bu, C(6)H(3)Me(2)-2,6, SiMe(3)) have been studied by using various ab initio and DFT molecular orbital techniques. The syn,syn conformation is found to be most stable for parent E(NH)(2), but in general, the preferred molecular conformation for substituted chalcogen diimides is syn,anti. In the case of E(NH)(2) the present calculations further confirm that syn,syn and syn,anti conformations lie energetically close to each other. From the three different theoretical methods used, B3PW91/6-31G proved to be the most suitable method for predicting the geometries of chalcogen diimides. The optimized geometrical parameters are in a good agreement with all available experimental data. While qualitative energy ordering of the different conformations is independent of the level of theory, the quantitative energy differences are dependent on the method used. The performance and reliability of higher level ab initio calculations and DFT methods using large basis sets were tested and compared with experimental information where available. All of the higher level ab inito methods give very similar results, but the use of large basis sets with the B3PW91 method does not increase the reliability of the results. The combination of CCSD(T)/cc-pVDZ with the B3PW91/6-31G-optimized geometries is found to be the method of choice to study energetic properties of chalcogen diimides.
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 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 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".