MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2131657273 · doi:10.1002/jcc.20726

Electron affinities of heavier phosphoryl and thiophosphoryl halides APX<sub>3</sub> (A = O, S and X = Br, I)

2007· article· en· W2131657273 on OpenAlexafffund
Tao Zeng, Zahra Jamshidi, Hirotoshi Mori, Eisaku Miyoshi, Mariusz Kłobukowski

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Computational Chemistry · 2007
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldChemistry
TopicCrystallography and molecular interactions
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Alberta
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of CanadaUniversity of AlbertaShiraz UniversityWestern Canada Research Grid
KeywordsChemistryAffinitiesDensity functional theoryComputational chemistryHalideMoleculePotential energy surfaceElectron affinity (data page)Natural bond orbitalMolecular physicsStereochemistryInorganic chemistryOrganic chemistry

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

We carried out computational studies of OPX3 and SPX3 (X = Br and I) molecules and their corresponding anions using density functional theory, Møller-Plesset, and CCSD(T) methods with newly developed model core potentials (MCP). Reliabilities of the MCP were demonstrated by comparing experimental and calculated results. We computed the geometric structure, electron affinities, and electrostatic moments using systematic sequences of the dzp-, tzp-, and qzp-quality basis sets. Both C3v and Cs symmetries were assumed to ascertain that minima on the potential energy surface were found. Infrared and Raman frequencies were calculated and compared with available experimental data. Natural population analyses were performed and used to determine distribution of the extra electron in anions.

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 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 score0.006
Threshold uncertainty score0.624

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 head0.006
GPT teacher head0.230
Teacher spread0.224 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designBench or experimental
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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

Citations2
Published2007
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Computational ChemistrySame topicCrystallography and molecular interactionsFrench-language works237,207