Heterogeneous Proton-Bound Dimers with a High Dipole Moment Monomer: How Could We Experimentally Observe These Anomalous Ionic Hydrogen Bonds?
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Electronic structure calculations (CBS-QB3 and G3MP2) have been used to predict a suitable method to experimentally observe the anomalous structure which is predicted to exist in a proton-bound dimer with a high dipole moment monomer. The enthalpy associated with forming the proton-bound dimer from its protonated and neutral monomers is shown to be linearly related to the difference in proton affinities which has been observed experimentally. However, unlike previous experimental studies, the linear correlation is not predicted to depend strongly, if at all, on whether the basic sites are C=O, C=N, or O(H) n-donor bases. Thermochemical measurements, then, are probably not the best method to distinguish between the structures of heterogeneous proton-bound dimers. It has been shown that a suitable method to experimentally observe the anomalous structure of proton-bound dimers containing a high dipole moment monomer (or very polar monomer) is by spectroscopic measurement. The O-H+-O asymmetric stretch is probably not the best infrared band to try to correlate with structure. The best band to observe is one which is in a region of the spectrum not masked by other absorptions and is also sensitive to the proximity of the binding proton. For example, it is shown that the methanol-free O-H stretch is very sensitive to the O-H+ bond distance for a series of heterogeneous proton-bound dimers containing methanol. It is predicted that the free O-H stretch of the methanol/acetonitrile proton-bound dimer is more closely related to the O-H stretch in protonated methanol than the O-H stretch in neutral methanol. Observations of these bands should confirm that the proton is closer to methanol in the methanol/acetonitrile proton-bound dimer despite acetonitrile having a higher proton affinity.
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 | 0.001 |
| 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 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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".