A General Protocol for Determining the Structures of Molecularly Ordered but Noncrystalline Silicate Frameworks
Bibliographic record
Abstract
A general protocol is demonstrated for determining the structures of molecularly ordered but noncrystalline solids, which combines constraints provided by X-ray diffraction (XRD), one- and two-dimensional solid-state nuclear magnetic resonance (NMR) spectroscopy, and first-principles quantum chemical calculations. The approach is used to determine the structure(s) of a surfactant-directed layered silicate with short-range order in two dimensions but without long-range periodicity in three-dimensions (3D). The absence of long-range 3D molecular order and corresponding indexable XRD reflections precludes determination of a space group for this layered silicate. Nevertheless, by combining structural constraints obtained from solid-state (29)Si NMR analyses, including the types and relative populations of distinct (29)Si sites, their respective (29)Si-O-(29)Si connectivities and separation distances, with unit cell parameters (though not space group symmetry) provided by XRD, a comprehensive search of candidate framework structures leads to the identification of a small number of candidate structures that are each compatible with all of the experimental data. Subsequent refinement of the candidate structures using density functional theory calculations allows their evaluation and identification of "best" framework representations, based on their respective lattice energies and quantitative comparisons between experimental and calculated (29)Si isotropic chemical shifts and (2)J((29)Si-O-(29)Si) scalar couplings. The comprehensive analysis identifies three closely related and topologically equivalent framework configurations that are in close agreement with all experimental and theoretical structural constraints. The subtle differences among such similar structural models embody the complexity of the actual framework(s), which likely contain coexisting or subtle distributions of structural order that are intrinsic to the material.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 teacher head, 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".