<i>Ab initio</i> calculations of nonlinear optical rotation by several small chiral molecules and by uridine stereoisomers
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Expressions for nonlinear optical rotation are presented based on the quantum theory of optical birefringence of Atkins and Barron [Proc. R. Soc. London, Ser. A 304, 303 (1968); 306, 119 (1968)]. As concrete examples, the ordinary and nonlinear optical rotations are calculated with density functional theory (DFT) methodology for some simple single-ring molecules, namely, oxaziridine, diaziridine, and their derivatives, and for two, somewhat more complicated, conformations of uridine. For the single-ring molecules, (1) the angles of the ordinary optical rotation are mostly positive and (2) the contributions of the nonlinear effect to the total optical rotation depend both on the nature of the substituted species and of the host atom located on the ring. For the two conformations of uridine, (1) the signs of nonlinear optical rotation differ even though their ordinary optical rotations have the same sign and (2) whether the molecular structures are geometrically optimized with Hartree-Fock or DFT methodologies has no significant effect on the calculated nonlinear optical rotation when gauge-including atomic orbitals were used, even though the basis sets are small. These studies are expected to be helpful for interpretation of experimental results on nonlinear optical rotation by molecules underway in our research group.
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) | 0.000 | 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".