Comparative study on the gas to solution phase solvation free energies of model combustion flue gas compounds (N~2~, O~2~, CO~2~, H~2~O, SO~2~, and CO) in 178 organic solvents using the IEFPCM-UFF, CPCM, and SMD implicit solvent models at the Gaussian-4 (G4) level of theory
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract Gas to solution phase Gibbs free energies of solvation at 298.15 K for transfer of six representative combustion flue gas compounds (N~2~, O~2~, CO~2~, H~2~O, SO~2~, and CO) were calculated at the Gaussian-4 (G4) level of theory using the IEFPCM-UFF, CPCM, and SMD implicit solvent models for 178 organic solvents. The IEFPCM-UFF and CPCM models yield similar free energies of solvation for all six compounds in each of the solvents considered, having maximum absolute intra-solvent deviations <1.6 kJ mol^-1^. Substantial free energy of solvation differences were observed between the IEFPCM-UFF/CPCM and SMD models, with maximum absolute intra-solvent deviations up to 45.5 kJ mol^-1^. The IEFPCM-UFF and CPCM models displayed strong free energy of solvation correlations with the solvent dielectric constant for each compound, whereas the SMD model exhibits a significantly more variable free energy of solvation relationship with the solvent dielectric constant.
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 | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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".