Cooperativity between hydrogen bonds and beryllium bonds in (H2O)nBeX2 (n = 1–3, X = H, F) complexes. A new perspective
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The interaction of BeX(2) (X = H, F) with water molecules has been analyzed at the B3LYP/6-311+G(3df,2p)//B3LYP/6-311+G(d,p) level of theory. The formation of strong beryllium bonds between water molecules and the BeX(2) derivative triggers significant electron density redistribution within the whole system, resulting in significant changes in the proton donor and proton acceptor capacity of the water molecules involved. Hence, significant cooperative and anti-cooperative effects are present, explaining why there is no case in which the global minimum corresponds to a tetracoordinated beryllium atom. In fact, the most stable clusters can be viewed as the result of the attachment of BeX(2) to the water trimer and the water dimer, respectively, and not as the result of the solvation of the BeX(2) molecule. We have also shown that the decomposition of the interaction energy into atomic components is a reliable quantitative tool to describe all the closed-shell interactions present in the clusters investigated herein, namely hydrogen bonds, beryllium bonds and dihydrogen bonds. Indeed, we have shown that the changes in the atomic energy components are correlated with the changes in the strength of these interactions, and they provide a quantitative measure of cooperative effects directly in terms of energies.
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.
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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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 it