Density Functional Study of Lithium Hexamethyldisilazide (LiHMDS) Complexes: Effects of Solvation and Aggregation
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The title compound, lithium hexamethyldisilazide (LiHMDS), has been studied using modern quantum-chemical methods in the form of the B3LYP approach. Monomers, dimers, trimers, and tetramers, microsolvated with up to four THF molecules have been considered. The choice of model complex is seen to be important-for instance, the simpler water molecule is shown to be an inappropriate substitute for the THF solvent. Calculated lithium NMR shieldings are reported, but by themselves, they seem to be insufficient for unequivocal assignments of the different species. The energetics of aggregation and solvation have been studied. Temperature effects are seen to be important, and the degrees of solvation and aggregation are higher at 0 K than at 298 K. The highest degree of THF solvation for the monomer and dimer is found to be three (0 K) and two (298 K), respectively. The highest possible degree of aggregation for unsolvated LiHMDS is four. However, in nonpolar solvents, formation of the LiHDMS dimer from the trimer is thermodynamically preferred. The pathway is likely to involve an intermediate tetramer. In THF solution, di-solvated monomers and dimers are the most likely species.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".