The protonated and sodiated dimers of proline studied by IRMPD spectroscopy in the N–H and O–H stretching region and computational methods
Bibliographic record
Abstract
IRMPD spectroscopy and computational chemistry techniques have been used to determine that the proton- and sodium-bound dimers of proline exist as a mixture of a number of different structures. Simulated annealing computations were found to be helpful in determining the unique structures of the protonated and sodiated dimers, augmenting chemical intuition. The experimental and computational results are consistent with the proton-bound dimer of N-protonated proline bound to zwitterionic proline. There was no spectroscopic evidence in the 3200-3800 cm(-1) region for a canonical structure which is predicted to have a weak N-H stretch at about 3440 cm(-1). A well resolved band at 1733 cm(-1) from a previous spectroscopic study (DOI: 10.1021/ja068715a ) was reassigned from a high energy canonical isomer to the C=O stretch of a lower energy zwitterionic structure. This band is a free carboxylate C=O stretch where protonated proline is hydrogen bonded to the other carboxylate oxygen which is also involved in an intramolecular hydrogen bond. Fifteen structures of the sodium bound proline dimer were computed to be within 10 kJ mol(-1) of Gibbs energy and eight structures were within 5 kJ mol(-1). None of these structures can be ruled out based on the experimental IRMPD spectrum. They all have an N-H stretching band predicted in a position that agrees with the experimental spectrum. However, only structures where one of the proline monomers is in the canonical form and having a free O-H bond can produce the band at ∼3600 cm(-1).
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 teacher head, 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".