MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2070951586 · doi:10.1080/00268970802220112

Reorganization free energies and quantum corrections for a model electron self-exchange reaction: comparison of polarizable and non-polarizable solvent models

2008· article· en· W2070951586 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueMolecular Physics · 2008
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPhysics and Astronomy
TopicSpectroscopy and Quantum Chemical Studies
Canadian institutionsConcordia University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPolarizabilityPolarizable continuum modelChemistryWater modelAqueous solutionSolvent effectsSolvationFree electron modelPhysicsIonThermodynamicsComputational chemistryChemical physicsElectronSolventMolecular dynamicsQuantum mechanicsPhysical chemistryMolecule

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The solvent contribution to the reorganization free energy for electron self-exchange in aqueous Ru(II)–Ru(III) is computed for two recently developed polarizable water models, AMOEBA [J. Phys. Chem. B 107, 5933 (2003)] and SWM4-NDP [Chem. Phys. Lett. 418, 241 (2005)], and for the earlier POL3 model [J. Phys. Chem. 99, 6208 (1995)], and compared with the reorganization free energy of non-polarizable water models. The ‘solute’, defined as the two ions and their first hydration shells, is treated as non-polarizable. We find that the solvent (‘outer sphere’) reorganization free energy is reduced by 22% for SWM4-NDP and by 11% for POL3 relative to the non-polarizable TIP3P water, but increased by 5% for AMOEBA water. This is less than the ≈38% reduction suggested by standard continuum theory and confirms the view that continuum theory predicts a stronger dependence of solvent reorganization on the optical dielectric constant than what is obtained from atomistic simulation. The varying degree of reduction in reorganization free energy for polarizable water models is the consequence of two opposing effects: (i) reduction in reorganization free energy due to decreased electronic response; and (ii) increase in reorganization free energy due to increased nuclear response. The first effect gives a consistent decrease of about 30%, while the second effect strongly depends on the polarizable water model used and is largest for AMOEBA water. Rate enhancements due to quantum corrections are computed in the harmonic bath approximation and range between 3.8 and 10.9, in good agreement with the estimate obtained from experimental dispersion data of liquid water, 7.7. The rigid non-polarizable water models overestimate the quantum correction in the libration modes, which effectively compensates for the neglect of quantum corrections in the absent stretching modes. About 85% of the solvent reorganization is due to the second and third solvation shell of the ion pair. Size effects caused by the finite number of solvent molecules are minor and much smaller than for oxidation of a single ion.

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.

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)0.000
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 score0.413
Threshold uncertainty score0.770

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
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 head0.016
GPT teacher head0.253
Teacher spread0.238 · 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