MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2066310084 · doi:10.1002/prep.200700037

Theoretical Prediction of Heats of Sublimation of Energetic Materials Using Pseudo‐Atomic Orbital Density Functional Theory Calculations

2007· article· en· W2066310084 on OpenAlexaff
Anguang Hu, Brian Larade, S. V. Dudiy, Hakima Abou‐Rachid, Louis‐Simon Lussier, Hong Guo

Bibliographic record

VenuePropellants Explosives Pyrotechnics · 2007
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicEnergetic Materials and Combustion
Canadian institutionsMcGill UniversityDefence Research and Development CanadaUniversité de Montréal
Fundersnot available
KeywordsSublimation (psychology)Density functional theoryAtomic orbitalMolecular orbitalQuantum chemistryMoleculeQuantumChemistryComputational chemistryThermodynamicsStatistical physicsPhysicsElectronQuantum mechanicsOrganic chemistry

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract We present a predictive model for the heats of sublimation of the condensed phases of energetic materials that combine the empirical relations of Politzer with first‐principles density‐functional calculations of the electronic properties of the molecular surfaces. The distinct features of our methodology are the use of numerical pseudo‐atomic orbitals for the quantum mechanical calculation of the electronic charge density, as well as an improved technique for the molecular surface area determination. As applications, we used our model to predict heats of sublimation of energetic molecules CL‐20, HMX, RDX, TNT, FOX‐7, TATB, and LLM‐105, with the Politzer parameters fit based on a set of eight nitro‐aromatic molecules. In comparison with conventional quantum chemistry calculations, our approach is tremendously less computationally demanding, yet it still demonstrates competitive accuracy and predictive power.

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 score0.005
Threshold uncertainty score0.010

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0010.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.018
GPT teacher head0.215
Teacher spread0.197 · 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

Citations27
Published2007
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuePropellants Explosives PyrotechnicsSame topicEnergetic Materials and CombustionFrench-language works237,207