Comparison of ab Initio and DFT Methods for Studying Chain Propagation and Chain Termination Processes with Group 4 Polymerization Catalysts. 1. The <i>ansa</i>-Bis(cyclopentadienyl)zirconium Catalyst
Bibliographic record
Abstract
In this paper we present a systematic comparison of the performance of different computational approaches to study the propagation and termination reactions of olefins with a prototype homogeneous group 4 ansa -metallocene catalyst. Chain propagation, β-H transfer to the monomer, and β-H elimination to the metal have been investigated for the H 2 Si(Cp) 2 ZrR + (R = ethyl, n -butyl) + C 2 H 4 system using ab initio and density functional theory (DFT) techniques. For all the species investigated, all the computational approaches we considered result in substantially similar geometries. A comparison of the DFT and Møller−Plesset theory (MP2) propagation and termination barriers with extrapolated coupled-cluster calculations with inclusion of single, double, and perturbatively connected triple excitation (CCSD(T)) values indicates that all the pure functionals considered underestimate the difference between termination and propagation by roughly 3−4 kcal/mol. In contrast, hybrid functionals are within 1 kcal/mol from extrapolated CCSD(T) values. For a comparison with experimental results inclusion of zero-point energy contributions and the use of an alkyl group longer than ethyl to simulate the growing chain in both termination reactions are mandatory.
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 | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 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) | 0.000 | 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; a candidate call from one teacher head, 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".