Optical purification of a mixture of chiral forms by dimer formation
Bibliographic record
Abstract
We introduce a readily executable method for the optical purification of "scalemic" (non 50%-50%) mixtures of chiral molecules of opposite handedness ("enantiomers"). The method relies on the formation of two types of dimers, (R-R or S-S) "homodimers" and (R-S) "heterodimers." The selectivity is linked to the difference in sign recently discovered by us to exist between certain transition-dipole matrix elements of opposite enantiomers. This sign difference results in differences in spectral propensity rules: In homodimers, transitions from the ground state can only take place to inversion symmetric excited states, while in the heterodimer the transitions are much more likely to proceed to antisymmetric excited states (although for heterodimers weak transitions to symmetric states might exist). These opposing propensity rules fully explain the observed large differences in the spectra of homodimers vs. heterodimers, which exist despite the almost identical energy levels positions. We illustrate the general concepts by computationally demonstrating the optically induced enantio-purification of scalemic mixtures of the hydropropionic C(3)H(6)O(3) (lactic) acid.
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) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
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".