MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W2167778965 · doi:10.1139/cjc-2015-0005

Calculation of anharmonic effects for the unimolecular dissociation of CH<sub>3</sub>OOH and its deuterated species CD<sub>3</sub>OOD using the Rice–Ramsperger–Kassel–Marcus theory

2015· article· en· W2167778965 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Qian Li, Li Yao, Shi‐Hsin Lin

Bibliographic record

VenueCanadian Journal of Chemistry · 2015
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPhysics and Astronomy
TopicAdvanced Chemical Physics Studies
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsChemistryAnharmonicityDissociation (chemistry)RRKM theoryKinetic isotope effectDeuteriumComputational chemistryReaction rate constantPhotochemistryPhysical chemistryAtomic physicsKineticsPhysicsQuantum mechanics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Anharmonic and harmonic rate constants for the unimolecular dissociation of CH3OOH and CD3OOD were calculated using the Rice–Ramsperger–Kassel–Marcus (RRKM) theory at the MP2/6-311++G(3df,3pd) level of theory. The anharmonic effect of the reactions was investigated. Comparison of results for the decompositions of CH3OOH and CD3OOD shows that the direct bond dissociation channel, CH3 (D3) O + OH (D), is the most dominant reaction. The anharmonic effect plays an important role in the unimolecular dissociation of both CH3OOH and CD3OOD. For channels CH3 (D3) O + OH (D) and CH3 (D3) + H (D) O2, the anharmonic effect of the unimolecular dissociation of CD3OOD is more pronounced than that of the unimolecular dissociation of CH3OOH. For channel H2 (D2) CO + H2 (D2) O, the anharmonic effect of the unimolecular dissociation of CH3OOH is more pronounced than that of the unimolecular dissociation of CD3OOD. The isotope effect is more distinct in the anharmonic oscillator model.

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)0.001
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: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.004
Threshold uncertainty score0.013

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0040.000

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 head0.013
GPT teacher head0.226
Teacher spread0.213 · 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 designSimulation or modeling
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

Citations1
Published2015
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCanadian Journal of Chemistry→Same topicAdvanced Chemical Physics Studies→French-language works237,207→