Computational Study of the Reactions of SiH<sub>3</sub>X (X = H, Cl, Br, I) with HCN
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Ab initio calculations were carried out for the reactions of silane and halosilanes (SiH3X, X=H, Cl, Br, I) with HCN. Geometries of the reactants, transition states, intermediates and products were optimized at HF, MP2, and B3LYP levels of theory using the 6-31G(d) and 6-31G(d,p) basis sets. Energies were also obtained using G3MP2 and G3B3 levels of theory. Intrinsic reaction coordinate (IRC) calculations were performed to characterize the transition states on the potential energy surface. It was found that HCN can react with silane and halosilanes via three different mechanisms. One involves HX elimination by a one-step pathway producing SiH3CN. The second mechanism consists of H2 elimination, producing SiH2XCN via a one-step pathway or three multiple-step pathways. The third mechanism involves dissociation of SiH3X to various products, which can then react with HCN. Activation energies, enthalpies, and free energies of activation along with the thermodynamic properties (DeltaE, DeltaH, and DeltaG) of each reaction pathway were calculated. The reaction of SiH3X with HCN produce different products depending on substituent X. We have found that the standard 6-31G(d) bromine basis set gave results which were in better agreement with the G3MP2 results than for the Binning-Curtiss basis set. Computed heats of formation (DeltaHf) for SiH3CN, SiH3NC, SiH2ClCN, SiH2BrCN, SiH2ICN, SiHCl, SiHBr, and SiHI were found to be 133.5, 150.8, -34.4, 23.6, 102.4, 48.7, 127.1, and 179.8 kJ mol-1, respectively. From enthalpies calculated at G3MP2, we predict that the DeltaHf for SiH2 to be 262.8 kJ mol-1 compared to the experimental value of 273.8+/-4.2 kJ mol-1.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.005 | 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".