Interaction of short-chain alkane thiols and thiolates with small gold clusters: Adsorption structures and energetics
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Gold–sulfur bonding is investigated theoretically using a variety of electronic structure methods, including the Becke–Perdew semilocal density functional, the B3LYP hybrid approach, the Hartree–Fock method, and the post Hartree–Fock approaches MP2 and QCISD(T). Particular emphasis is given to adsorption structure and energetics in the case of weak and strong interactions of this general type, using up to five gold atoms and up to three carbon atoms in the aliphatic chain. It is found that all methods which take into account electron correlation, including the density functional methods, lead to quite similar structures. Concerning the energetics, the Becke–Perdew functional is found to overbind typically by about 5–15%. Quasiglobal structural relaxation based on ab initio simulated annealing clearly shows that the adsorption of thiolates onto gold clusters results in a dramatic distortion of the cluster framework. From a structural point of view the thiolate sulfur–gold bond has a distinctive directional (covalent) character which results in a clear preference for Au–S–C bond angles in the range of 103.5° and 108.7°. In general, dissociation into open-shell species is preferred against the formation of the ionic closed-shell counterparts if the sulfur–gold bond is forced to break. However, neutral closed-shell products can be favored if fragmentation of the gold cluster is allowed for as a dissociation channel. Finally, it is demonstrated that using ethyl or n-propyl chains instead of the methyl group leads to only small changes of the binding 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.
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 | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 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".