Comparative theoretical studies of dinitromethyl- or trinitromethyl-modified derivatives of CL-20
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The heats of formation (HOFs), energetic properties, strain energies, thermal stability, and impact sensitivity for a series of trinitromethyl- or dinitromethyl-modified CL-20 derivatives were studied by using density functional theory. It is found that the trinitromethyl group is an effective structural unit for improving the gas-phase HOFs and energetic properties of the derivatives. However, incorporating the dinitromethyl group into the parent compound is not favorable for increasing its HOFs and detonation properties. The effects of the dinitromethyl or trinitromethyl groups on the stability of the parent compound are discussed. The studies on strain energies show that the introduction of the trinitromethyl group intensifies the strain of the cage skeleton for the title compounds, whereas for the dinitromethyl groups, the case is quite the contrary. An analysis of the bond dissociation energies for several relatively weak bonds suggests that the substitution of the dinitromethyl or trinitromethyl group decreases the thermal stability of the derivatives. The C−NO2 bond in the dinitromethyl or trinitromethyl group is the weakest one and the homolysis of the C−NO2 bond may be the initial step in thermal decomposition. In addition, according to the calculated free space per molecule, the introduction of the dinitromethyl or trinitromethyl group increases the impact sensitivities of the derivatives. Considering the detonation performance, thermal stability, and impact sensitivity, six compounds can be regarded as the target high-energetic compounds.
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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.004 | 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 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".