MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2094267599 · doi:10.1021/ja993226e

Electric Field Simulation of Substituents in Donor−Acceptor Polyenes:  A Comparison with Ab Initio Predictions for Dipole Moments, Polarizabilities, and Hyperpolarizabilities

2000· article· en· W2094267599 on OpenAlex

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.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of the American Chemical Society · 2000
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMaterials Science
TopicNonlinear Optical Materials Research
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Ottawa
Fundersnot available
KeywordsChemistryDipoleDelocalized electronAb initioPolarizabilityComputational chemistryAcceptorElectric fieldMolecular physicsField (mathematics)Ab initio quantum chemistry methodsAtomic physicsMoleculeOrganic chemistryCondensed matter physicsQuantum mechanicsPhysics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The treatment of dipole moments (μ), polarizabilities (α), and hyperpolarizabilities (β, γ) in push−pull systems using electric field simulation for the substituents is reanalyzed and tested by comparison with ab initio Hartree−Fock calculations on representative donor−acceptor (D/A) polyenes. Both vibrational and electronic contributions are properly taken into account. We find that the field simulation approach can be applied semiquantitatively to relate the odd-order (μ, β) properties only. Even for these properties, however, features such as the chain-length dependence cannot be reproduced due to the excessively delocalized description of the D/A substituents.

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 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 categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: Bench or experimental
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.009
Threshold uncertainty score0.297

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)0.0000.000

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 head0.015
GPT teacher head0.295
Teacher spread0.279 · 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