MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2080901924 · doi:10.1139/p02-147

Ab initio molecular-orbital calculations for dodecahedral water clusters including rare-gas atoms

2003· article· en· W2080901924 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Akira Hori, Takeo Hondoh

Bibliographic record

VenueCanadian Journal of Physics · 2003
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicMethane Hydrates and Related Phenomena
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsDodecahedronNeonRare gasClathrate hydrateCluster (spacecraft)Ab initioPhysicsAtomic physicsMoleculeAtom (system on chip)Molecular orbitalAb initio quantum chemistry methodsMolecular physicsHydrateCrystallographyChemistryArgon

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Dodecahedral water clusters including rare-gas atoms and molecules are considered to play an important role in the beginning of the formation of gas hydrates in solutions. To investigate their stability, ab initio molecular-orbital calculations were performed at the MP2/6-311G(d,p)//HF/6-311G(d,p) level. In He, Ne, Ar, and Kr, the cohesive energies of the 12-hedral water clusters including each rare-gas atom were negative, whereas in Xe they were positive. Neon in the dodecahedral cluster was almost as stable as Ar and Kr in the dodecahedral clusters; the latter two are known as clathrate-forming gases. This suggests the probability of the existence of Ne clathrate hydrate, which is generally considered to be impossible. The chemical shifts of Xe incorporated in polyhedral water clusters were computed for the first time. The computed values qualitatively agree with the experimental results. PACS Nos.: 31.15Ar, 31.15Md, 31.15Ne, 36.40Cg, 36.40Mr

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.035
Threshold uncertainty score0.070

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0020.002
Science and technology studies0.0020.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0020.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0060.001

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.

Opus teacher head0.020
GPT teacher head0.232
Teacher spread0.213 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

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

Citations7
Published2003
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCanadian Journal of PhysicsSame topicMethane Hydrates and Related PhenomenaFrench-language works237,207