MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2120603217 · doi:10.1002/0470862106.ia267

Bond Lengths in Inorganic Solids & Liquids

2005· other· en· W2120603217 on OpenAlexaff
I. D. Brown

Bibliographic record

VenueEncyclopedia of Inorganic Chemistry · 2005
Typeother
Languageen
FieldChemical Engineering
TopicIonic liquids properties and applications
Canadian institutionsMcMaster University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsBond lengthSextuple bondCovalent bondBond orderIonic bondingCoulombBond energyChemical bondSingle bondValence electronChemistryValence (chemistry)Molecular geometryMolecular physicsChemical physicsCrystallographyElectronPhysicsQuantum mechanicsMoleculeIonGroup (periodic table)

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract The length of a chemical bond is determined by the number of valence electron pairs associated with it. In a simple electrostatic picture, this number is equal to the electrostatic flux linking the bonded atoms. The flux obeys a number of chemically useful theorems, and since it is independent of the ionic or covalent character of the bond, any bond can be transformed to the ionic limit where the flux can be calculated using Coulomb's law. Alternatively, by recognizing that a network of ionically bonded atoms is a capacitive electric circuit, the flux can be determined using the Kirchhoff equations. The correlation between the bond length and bond flux (or bond valence) allows the bond geometry to be predicted even for unknown compounds. A comparison of the observed bond lengths with those expected is useful in validating and analyzing an observed structure. Atomic radii can also be used to predict bond lengths in regular coordination spheres, but they are unable to predict the distortions from regularity typically found in low symmetry structures.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Other · Consensus signal: Other
Teacher disagreement score0.011
Threshold uncertainty score0.035

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0020.002
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0020.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0110.003

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 head0.006
GPT teacher head0.221
Teacher spread0.215 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreOther

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

Citations1
Published2005
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueEncyclopedia of Inorganic ChemistrySame topicIonic liquids properties and applicationsFrench-language works237,207