MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2159023729 · doi:10.1139/v07-103

Solvation and electronic structures of M<sup>+</sup>L<sub><i>n</i></sub>, with M<sup>+</sup> = Mg<sup>+</sup> and Ca<sup>+</sup>, L = H<sub>2</sub>O, CH<sub>3</sub>OH, and NH<sub>3</sub>, and <i>n</i> = 1–6

2007· article· en· W2159023729 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
KH Chan, Yan-Ling Wu

Bibliographic record

VenueCanadian Journal of Chemistry · 2007
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPhysics and Astronomy
TopicSpectroscopy and Quantum Chemical Studies
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersHong Kong GovernmentChinese University of Hong Kong
KeywordsSolvationChemistrySolventAb initioAb initio quantum chemistry methodsCluster (spacecraft)Solvated electronSolvent effectsPhysical chemistrySolvation shellComputational chemistryMoleculeAqueous solutionRadiolysisOrganic chemistry

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The solvation clusters M+(L)n, with a singly charged alkaline earth cation Mg+ or Ca+ as the solute and with water, methanol, or ammonia as the solvent, are studied systematically in the size range n = 1–6, to compare the variations in the solvation interactions. For clusters with n ≤ 3, the energies and structural values are compared in details, with both the MP2 and B3LYP methods. For clusters with n ≥ 4, the solute–solvent and solvent–solvent interaction energies are calculated to explain the relative stability among various isomeric structures, and the contrast in both solvent and electron distribution among these cluster series. Thermal stabilities for these clusters are also examined by ab initio molecular dynamics simulations at finite temperature.Key words: solvation clusters, ab initio calculations, solute–solvent interactions, size-dependent effects.

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)0.000
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation 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 score0.005
Threshold uncertainty score0.016

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0050.000

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 head0.004
GPT teacher head0.196
Teacher spread0.192 · 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 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

Citations3
Published2007
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCanadian Journal of ChemistrySame topicSpectroscopy and Quantum Chemical StudiesFrench-language works237,207