MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2086981656 · doi:10.1139/v05-002

Conformational study of internally retrograde and quasi-retrograde molecules An ab initio and DFT study

2005· article· en· W2086981656 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Miguel Zamora, L.N. Santagata, Marcelo F. Masman, José A. Bombasaro, M.L. Freile, Ricardo D. Enriz

Bibliographic record

VenueCanadian Journal of Chemistry · 2005
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldChemistry
TopicCrystallography and molecular interactions
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersUniversidad Nacional de San Luis
KeywordsChemistryAb initioComputational chemistryMoleculeDensity functional theoryElectronic correlationSeries (stratigraphy)Ab initio quantum chemistry methodsCrystallographyOrganic chemistry

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

A conformational study of the symmetrical and nonsymmetrical homologue series was carried out. In this study, ab initio (RHF/3-21G and RHF/6-31G(d)) and density functional theory (B3LYP/6-31G(d)) calculations were performed. The presence of two symmetrical aromatic systems (identical or not) reduces notably the conformational possibilities of these compounds. Our results indicate that RHF/3-21G calculations are sufficient to use in a preliminary form. However, from our results it is prudent to use this technique only for a preliminary or exploratory conformational analysis. Thus, at least, the HF level of theory in conjunction with more extended basis sets and the inclusion of electron correlation appear to be necessary to confirm critical points at the potential energy hyper surfaces (PEHSs) and to assign the conformational preferences of these compounds. In the present paper, we report a complete and comprehensive picture of the conformational intricacies of the compounds with a small flexible connecting chain (n = 1–5). In addition, an "educated guess" for the conformational behaviour of large-size homologues (n = 6–10) is also reported.Key words: ab initio and DFT calculations, conformational study, homologue series.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.449
Threshold uncertainty score0.692

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.010
GPT teacher head0.243
Teacher spread0.233 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

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

Citations5
Published2005
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCanadian Journal of ChemistrySame topicCrystallography and molecular interactionsFrench-language works237,207