MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2046516261 · doi:10.1063/1.1369660

Band strengths for C–H stretching polyads of CHBr3 calculated by use of a two-dimensional electric dipole moment surface from density functional theory

2001· article· en· W2046516261 on OpenAlexaff
Hai Lin, Lan-Feng Yuan, Sheng‐Gui He, Xiaogang Wang

Bibliographic record

VenueThe Journal of Chemical Physics · 2001
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPhysics and Astronomy
TopicAdvanced Chemical Physics Studies
Canadian institutionsUniversité de Montréal
Fundersnot available
KeywordsDipoleElectric dipole momentMoment (physics)Band bendingPhysicsAb initioAtomic physicsFermi resonanceDensity functional theoryTransition dipole momentMolecular physicsSurface (topology)Magnetic dipoleBond dipole momentElectronic band structureChemistryCondensed matter physicsQuantum mechanicsInfraredGeometry

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Band strengths of the Fermi resonance polyads involving C–H stretching and bending vibrations for the CHBr3 molecule are calculated with a one-dimensional dipole function and a two-dimensional dipole surface. These are obtained by the ab initio density functional method. Both treatments reproduce the interpolyad band strengths quite well, while the two-dimensional dipole moment surface is superior to the one-dimensional one in modeling the intrapolyad band strength pattern, indicating the importance of the bending vibrations in dipole moment surface and intensities calculations. The different behavior of interpolyad band strengths of CHBr3 compared to CHCl3, with an intensity anomaly occurring in the latter case, is illustrated by “dipole–weighted” overlap integrals.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.007
Threshold uncertainty score0.016

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0020.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0020.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0050.001

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 head0.013
GPT teacher head0.248
Teacher spread0.235 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designSimulation or modeling
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

Citations9
Published2001
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueThe Journal of Chemical PhysicsSame topicAdvanced Chemical Physics StudiesFrench-language works237,207