A Theoretical Study of the Large Hg−Hg Spin−Spin Coupling Constants in Hg<sub>2</sub><sup>2+</sup>, Hg<sub>3</sub><sup>2+</sup>, and Hg<sub>2</sub><sup>2+</sup>−Crown Ether Complexes
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Nuclear spin-spin coupling constants (1)J(Hg-Hg) in the systems Hg(2)(2+) and Hg(3)(2+) represent the largest coupling constants so far observed in NMR experiments. We have performed a computational study on these ions, on Hg(2)(2+) complexes with 18-crown-6 and 15-crown-5, and on Hg(3)(2+) with solvent molecules and counterions. The results obtained with our recently developed program for the density functional computation of heavy nucleus spin-spin coupling constants are in good agreement with experiments. The data reveal that the bare ions Hg(2)(2+) and Hg(3)(2+) would afford much larger coupling constants than those experimentally observed, with an upper limit of approximately 0.9 MHz for Hg(2)(2+). This limit is much larger than that previously estimated by Hückel theory. It is demonstrated that in solution or due to complexation the experimentally determined values are much smaller than the free ion's coupling constants. With the help of intuitive MO arguments, it is illustrated how the environment strongly reduces the coupling constants in Hg(2)(2+) and Hg(3)(2+). The two-bond coupling constant (2)J(Hg-Hg) in Hg(3)(2+) is also examined.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.004 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.004 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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; both teacher heads agree on what is shown here.
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".