Dipole oscillator strength distributions, properties, and dispersion energies for ethylene, propene, and 1-butene
Bibliographic record
Abstract
A recommended isotropic dipole oscillator strength distribution (DOSD) has been constructed for the ethylene molecule through the use of quantum mechanical constraint techniques and experimental dipole oscillator strength (DOS) data; the DOS data employed are recent experimental results not available at the time of the original constrained DOSD analysis of this molecule. The constraints are furnished by molar refractivity data and the Thomas–Reiche–Kuhn sum rule. The DOSD is used to evaluate a variety of isotropic dipole oscillator strength sums, logarithmic dipole oscillator strength sums, and mean excitation energies for ethylene. Pseudo-DOSDs for this molecule, and for propene and 1–butene, which are based on an earlier constrained DOSD analysis for these molecules, are developed. They are used to obtain reliable results for the isotropic dipole–dipole dispersion-energy coefficients C6, for the interactions of the alkenes with each other and with 47 other species, and the triple-dipole dispersion-energy coefficients C9 for interactions involving any triple of molecules taken from ethylene, propene, and 1–butene.Key words: alkenes, dipole properties, pseudo-states, dipole–dipole and triple-dipole dispersion energies, long-range additive, non-additive interaction energies.
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 | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 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".