MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2047877902 · doi:10.1063/1.4794157

Novel patterns of torsion-inversion-rotation energy levels in the ν11 asymmetric CH-stretch spectrum of methylamine

2013· article· en· W2047877902 on OpenAlexaff
Mahesh B. Dawadi, C. Michael Lindsay, Andrei Chirokolava, David S. Perry, Li-Hong Xu

Bibliographic record

VenueThe Journal of Chemical Physics · 2013
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldChemistry
TopicMolecular Spectroscopy and Structure
Canadian institutionsUniversity of New Brunswick
FundersU.S. Department of Energy
KeywordsTorsion (gastropod)Inversion (geology)MethylamineEnergy spectrumRotation (mathematics)PhysicsGeologyGeometryMathematicsChemistryAstrophysicsSeismologyMedicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The high-resolution infrared spectrum of methylamine (CH3NH2) has been recorded using slit-jet direct absorption spectroscopy in the ν11 CH-stretch region (2965-3005 cm(-1)) with a resolution of 0.0025 cm(-1). The 621 lines assigned by ground state combination differences represent 27 substates with |K(')| ≤ 2 for the A, B, E1, and E2 symmetries. The spectrum of CH3NH2 is complicated by torsion and inversion tunneling connecting six equivalent minima. The upper states K(') = 0, ± 1 for E1 and E2 are substantially perturbed by "dark" states. The result in the spectrum is multiplets of 2 or 3 states with mixed bright∕dark character. The analysis of the spectrum reveals two qualitative differences in the energy level pattern relative to the vibrational ground state and relative to available data on the lower frequency vibrations (NH2 wag and CN stretch). First at J(') = 0, there is a different ordering of the levels connected by torsion-inversion tunneling. Second, the low-J splittings indicative of torsion-rotation coupling are greatly reduced in the ν11 excited state relative to the vibrational ground state for both the E1 and E2 species, suggesting the partial suppression of torsional tunneling in the ν11 CH-stretch excited state.

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 score0.012
Threshold uncertainty score0.317

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 head0.011
GPT teacher head0.234
Teacher spread0.223 · 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
Published2013
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueThe Journal of Chemical PhysicsSame topicMolecular Spectroscopy and StructureFrench-language works237,207