MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2081980369 · doi:10.1063/1.1288372

Can a local mode picture account for vibration–torsion coupling? <i>Ab initio</i> test based on torsional variation of methyl stretching and bending frequencies in methanol

2000· article· en· W2081980369 on OpenAlexaff
Li‐Hong Xu

Bibliographic record

VenueThe Journal of Chemical Physics · 2000
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPhysics and Astronomy
TopicAdvanced Chemical Physics Studies
Canadian institutionsUniversity of New Brunswick
Fundersnot available
KeywordsAb initioTorsion (gastropod)Normal modeMolecular physicsAmplitudeTorsional vibrationAb initio quantum chemistry methodsChemistryPhysicsMolecular vibrationQuantum tunnellingAtomic physicsVibrationCondensed matter physicsQuantum mechanicsMolecule

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The torsional dependence of the CH3 stretching and bending modes of methanol has been explored in terms of a local mode internal coordinate picture [X. Wang and D. S. Perry, J. Chem. Phys. 109, 10795 (1998)]. First, the torsional variations of the small-amplitude vibrational frequencies along the mass weighted intrinsic reaction coordinate from the top to the bottom of the torsional potential barrier were calculated by means of ab initio frequency projection utilizing GAUSSIAN 98. The resulting curves for the three C–H stretch ab initio frequencies as functions of the torsional angle cannot be reproduced by the original 3×3 local mode model incorporating stretch–torsion and stretch–stretch couplings at lowest-order only, but are well-fitted if the model is extended to include higher-order coupling terms. For the CH-bending modes, with internal coordinates chosen to give a high degree of localization, bend–torsion and bend–bend coupling parameters were determined from the ab initio projected frequencies, and were then used to predict torsional tunneling splittings. Just as observed for the C–H stretch modes, the two higher-frequency asymmetric CH-bend modes are predicted to have inverted tunneling splittings with reduced amplitudes, while the splitting pattern for the lower frequency symmetric-bend mode is predicted to be normal.

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)0.002
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 score0.006
Threshold uncertainty score0.019

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.002
Open science0.0030.001
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 head0.010
GPT teacher head0.254
Teacher spread0.244 · 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

Citations30
Published2000
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueThe Journal of Chemical PhysicsSame topicAdvanced Chemical Physics StudiesFrench-language works237,207