MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2070828091 · doi:10.1063/1.1866095

Electron spin resonance g tensors for complexes of Ne and Ar with AlO: Theoretical studies related to the large matrix effect observed for AlO

2005· article· en· W2070828091 on OpenAlexafffund
Friedrich Grein

Bibliographic record

VenueThe Journal of Chemical Physics · 2005
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldChemistry
TopicInorganic Fluorides and Related Compounds
Canadian institutionsUniversity of New Brunswick
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada
KeywordsAxial symmetryPerpendicularChemistryAtomic physicsElectronResonance (particle physics)AnisotropyPhysicsGeometryOptics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

For Ne(n)-AlO (n=2, 4, 6, 8, 10) and Ar(n)-AlO clusters (n=2, 4, 6, 8), the perpendicular (relative to AlO) component of the g tensor was calculated by second-order perturbation theory, using multireference configuration-interaction wave functions. The rare-gas (Rg) atoms were placed axially and/or off axially (one or two rings of four Rg atoms each), and the distance of the Rg atoms from the Al and O atoms, or from the AlO axis, was varied from 4 to 12 bohrs. Rg atoms placed axially mostly increase g(perpendicular), whereas off-axially placed ones lower it below the gas-phase value of AlO. The largest deviations from g(perpendicular) of isolated AlO occur at Ne-Al,O distances of 5-6 bohrs, and Ar-Al,O distances of 6-9 bohrs, with maximal lowerings of about 1600 ppm for Ne and about 2200 ppm (estimated) for Ar in the case of two axial and eight off-axial Rg atoms. Electron spin resonance studies by Knight and Weltner found large matrix effects for AlO, with downshifts of g(perpendicular) observed to be about 450 and 1150 ppm in Ne and Ar matrices, respectively.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: Bench or experimental
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.006
Threshold uncertainty score0.335

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.010
GPT teacher head0.272
Teacher spread0.262 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designBench or experimental
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

Citations5
Published2005
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueThe Journal of Chemical PhysicsSame topicInorganic Fluorides and Related CompoundsFrench-language works237,207