The hemibond as an alternative condensed phase structure for the hydroxyl radical
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Despite the critical importance of the hydroxyl radical in major scientific fields, there are still open questions on the behavior of this species in the aqueous phase. In particular, there has been much debate on the existence of a hemibonded interaction between the hydroxyl radical and water molecules. While some reports indicate that the hemibonded radical might explain some experimental data, others have claimed that this interaction is simply a density functional theory (DFT) artifact. Here, we provide results from high level (basis set limit of coupled-cluster levels up to single, double, triple excitations (CCSD(T)) and beyond) ab initio calculations of different OH•(H2O)n clusters in the gas phase to accurately explore the existence of the hemibonded interaction and its energy difference with respect to other well-defined hydrogen bond interactions. Additional comparisons with second order perturbation theory (MP2) and DFT are also presented. Constrained molecular dynamics was applied to determine the free energy for the formation/disruption and ice systems. Overall, our findings confirm that the hemibond can be an alternative structure for the hydroxyl radical in the condensed phase when the formation of hydrogen bonds is impeded. These results will aid the understanding of theoretical and experimental data and help future experimental designs for the detection of this important species.
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 | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.007 | 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".