Estimation of Enthalpy Data for Reactions Involving Gas Phase Ions Utilizing Lattice Potential Energies: Fluoride Ion Affinities (FIA) and pF<sup>-</sup> Values of <i>m</i>SbF<sub>5</sub>(l) and <i>m</i>SbF<sub>5</sub>(g) (<i>m</i> = 1, 2, 3), AsF<sub>5</sub>(g), AsF<sub>5</sub>·SO<sub>2</sub>(c). Standard Enthalpies of Formation: Δ<sub>f</sub><i>H</i>°(Sb<i><sub>m</sub></i>F<sub>5</sub><i><sub>m</sub></i><sub>+1</sub><sup>-</sup>,g) (<i>m</i> = 1, 2, 3), Δ<sub>f</sub><i>H</i>°(AsF<sub>6</sub><sup>-</sup>,g), and Δ<sub>f</sub><i>H</i>°(NF<sub>4</sub><sup>+</sup>,g)
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Fluoride ion affinity (FIA) values (and the associated pF(-) values) are difficult to establish experimentally for pentafluorides of arsenic and antimony. Our approach, utilizing estimated lattice potential energies, provides a further opportunity to establish this data for liquid (and gaseous) SbF(5) and gaseous AsF(5) which compliments values obtained using ab initio routes for monomeric gas phase molecules and adds to results based on rigorous methods. A strategy is developed whereby construction of (multiple) Born-Fajans-Haber cycles centered around the (target) FIA reaction of interest yield a plethora of estimates for the enthalpy change of interest. This general approach is illustrated here by specific estimation of some experimentally based FIA values of SbF(5) and AsF(5). FIA values/kJ mol(-1) and pF- values estimated in this paper are FIA(SbF(5),l) approximately equal to -475 (+/-63), pF-(SbF(5),l) = 11.4 (+/-1.5); FIA(SbF(5),g) approximately equal to -506 (+/-63), pF-(SbF(5),g) = 12.4 (+/-1.5); FIA(2SbF(5),l) approximately equal to -609 (+/-63), pF- (2SbF(5),l) = 14.6 (+/-1.5); FIA (2SbF(5),g) approximately equal to -671 (+/-63), pF- (2SbF(5),g) = 16.0 (+/-1.5); FIA (3SbF(5),l) approximately -635 (+/-39), pF(-) (3SbF(5),l) = 15.2 (+/-0.9); FIA(3SbF(5),g) approximately -728 (+/-39), pF(-) (3SbF(5),g) = 17.4 (+/-0.9); FIA(AsF(5),g) approximately equal to -421 (+/-22), pF(-) (AsF(5),g) = 10.1 (+/- 0.5); and FIA (AsF(5).SO(2),s) approximately equal to -390 (+/-22), pF(-) (AsF(5).SO(2),s) = 9.3 (+/-0.5). Related standard enthalpies of formation (in kJ mol(-1)) are also assigned: Delta(f)H degrees (SbF(6)(-),g) approximately equal to -2075 (+/-52); Delta(f)H degrees (Sb(2)F(11)(-),g) approximately equal to -3520 (+/-63); Delta(f)H degrees (Sb(3)F(16)(-),g) approximately equal to -4874 (+/-39); Delta(f)H degrees (NF(4)(+),g) approximately equal to 903 (+/-32); Delta(f)H degrees (AsF(6)(-),g) approximately equal to -1907 (+/-22).
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.005 | 0.001 |
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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".