MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2093476123 · doi:10.1103/physrevb.87.024101

Bonding, structures, and band gap closure of hydrogen at high pressures

2013· article· en· W2093476123 on OpenAlexaff
Alexander F. Goncharov, John S. Tse, Hui Wang, Jianjun Yang, Viktor V. Struzhkin, Ross T. Howie, Eugene Gregoryanz

Bibliographic record

VenuePhysical Review B · 2013
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEarth and Planetary Sciences
TopicHigh-pressure geophysics and materials
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Saskatchewan
FundersEngineering and Physical Sciences Research CouncilU.S. Department of Energy
KeywordsAb initioAnharmonicityRaman spectroscopyBand gapMolecular dynamicsMolecular physicsAb initio quantum chemistry methodsValence (chemistry)HydrogenSpectral lineChemistryGrapheneElectronic structureMaterials scienceChemical physicsCondensed matter physicsMoleculeComputational chemistryNanotechnologyPhysics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

We have studied dense hydrogen and deuterium experimentally up to 320 GPa and using ab initio molecular dynamic (MD) simulations up to 370 GPa between 250 and 300 K. Raman and optical absorption spectra show significant anharmonic and quantum effects in mixed atomic and molecular dense phase-IV of hydrogen. In agreement with these observations, ab initio MD simulations near 300 K show extremely large atomic motions, which include molecular rotations, hopping, and even pair fluctuations, suggesting that phase IV may not have a well-defined crystalline structure. The structurally diverse layers (molecular and graphenelike) are strongly coupled, thus opening an indirect band gap; moreover, at 300 GPa, we find fast synchronized intralayer structural fluctuations. At 370 GPa, the mixed structure collapses to form a metallic molecular Cmca-4 phase, which exhibits a new interstitial valence charge bonding scheme.

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 categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.326
Threshold uncertainty score0.999

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)0.0020.000

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 head0.012
GPT teacher head0.236
Teacher spread0.225 · 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.

Study designObservational
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

Citations68
Published2013
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuePhysical Review BSame topicHigh-pressure geophysics and materialsFrench-language works237,207