The microwave spectra and structures of Ar–AgX (X=F,Cl,Br)
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The rotational spectra of the complexes Ar–AgF, Ar–AgCl, and Ar–AgBr have been observed in the frequency range 6–20 GHz using a pulsed jet cavity Fourier transform microwave spectrometer. All the complexes are linear and rather rigid in the ground vibrational state, with the Ar–Ag stretching frequency estimated as ∼140 cm−1. Isotopic data have been used to calculate an r0 structure for Ar–AgF, while for Ar–AgCl and Ar–AgBr partial substitution structures have also been obtained. To reduce zero-point vibrational effects a double substitution method (rd) was employed to calculate the structures of Ar–AgCl and Ar–AgBr. The Ar–Ag bond distance has been found to be rather short and to range from 2.56 Å in Ar–AgF to 2.64 Å in Ar–AgBr. Ab initio MP2 and density functional theory calculations for Ar–AgF and Ar–AgCl model the geometries and stretching frequency well, and predict an Ar–Ag bond energy in Ar–AgF of ∼23 kJ mol−1. These results indicate that the Ar–AgX complexes are more strongly bound than typical van der Waals complexes. Analysis of the halogen nuclear quadrupole coupling constants was unable to confirm whether extensive electron rearrangement occurs upon formation of the complexes.
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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.004 | 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".