MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2171685057 · doi:10.1139/v04-070

Ultraviolet cavity ringdown spectra of 2-cyclohexen-1-one and its potential energy function and structure for the electronic ground state

2004· article· en· W2171685057 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Emily J. Gilles, Jaebum Choo, Daniel Autrey, Mohamed Rishard, Stephen Drucker, Jaan Laane

Bibliographic record

VenueCanadian Journal of Chemistry · 2004
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldChemistry
TopicSpectroscopy and Laser Applications
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsChemistryRaman spectroscopyExcited stateSpectral lineGround stateAtomic physicsPotential energyAnalytical Chemistry (journal)Basis setDensity functional theoryComputational chemistryOpticsPhysicsQuantum mechanics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The S 1 (n,π*) ← S 0 cavity ringdown spectrum of 2-cyclohexen-1-one vapor has been recorded in the vicinity of the 0 0 0 band, which is at 26 089.1 cm –1 . Observation of hot bands in the spectrum has permitted the determination of several low-frequency fundamentals and overtones in the ground electronic state. The lowest two excited quantum states for the inversion vibration (v 39 ) were found to be at 99.0 and 197.0 cm –1 . Together with previously published far-IR spectra and vapor-phase Raman spectra, the fundamental frequencies for v 39 , v 38 , and v 37 have been determined. From observed v 39 levels, the barrier to inversion has been determined experimentally to be 1900 ± 300 cm –1 , which is very different from values of 935 and 3379 cm –1 previously reported from Raman and far-IR data, respectively. Density functional calculations carried out in this paper give a barrier value of 2090 cm -1 when the B3LYP/6-311+G(d,p) basis set is used.Key words: cavity ringdown spectra, 2-cyclohexen-1-one, Raman spectra, potential energy function, inversion barrier.

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 score0.022
Threshold uncertainty score0.453

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 head0.004
GPT teacher head0.192
Teacher spread0.188 · 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

Citations7
Published2004
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCanadian Journal of ChemistrySame topicSpectroscopy and Laser ApplicationsFrench-language works237,207