MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2057179717 · doi:10.1139/cjc-2014-0243

Molecular dynamics investigation of the effect of solvent adsorption on crystal habits of hexogen

2014· article· en· W2057179717 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Gang Chen, Mingzhu Xia, Wu Lei, Fengyun Wang, Xuedong Gong

Bibliographic record

VenueCanadian Journal of Chemistry · 2014
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMaterials Science
TopicCrystallization and Solubility Studies
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsChemistryCyclohexanoneAdsorptionvan der Waals forceSolventCrystal (programming language)AcetonePolarMolecular dynamicsPhysical chemistryComputational chemistryOrganic chemistryMolecule

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In this work, a molecular dynamics investigation was performed to study the effect of the solvents acetone and cyclohexanone on the crystal habits of hexogen. The results show that the adsorption energies of hexogen polar faces such as the (002), (210), (111), and (200) faces are larger than that of the nonpolar (020) face. The adsorption interactions of hexogen surfaces with acetone are stronger than those with cyclohexanone. The adsorption interactions consist of van der Waals and electrostatic interactions. The effect of solvents on the crystal growth of hexogen is discussed by comparing the adsorption energy of each crystal face. It may qualitatively predict that if hexogen crystallizes from polar solvents (acetone and cyclohexanone), the morphological importance of polar faces increases, especially in acetone solvent, while the importance of the nonpolar (020) face probably diminishes, even disappears. The theoretical prediction properly explains the different crystal morphologies of hexogen observed experimentally in these two solvents.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
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: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.007
Threshold uncertainty score0.014

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

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 communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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 head0.006
GPT teacher head0.199
Teacher spread0.193 · 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

Citations21
Published2014
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCanadian Journal of ChemistrySame topicCrystallization and Solubility StudiesFrench-language works237,207