The mutual influence of Y···N and H···H interactions in XHY···NCH···HM complexes (X = F, Cl, Br; Y = S, Se; M = Li, Na, BeH, MgH): tuning of the chalcogen bond by dihydrogen bond interaction
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The equilibrium structures, interaction energies, and bonding properties of ternary XHY···NCH···HM complexes are studied by ab initio calculations, where X = F, Cl, Br, Y = S, Se, and M = Li, Na, BeH, MgH. The ab initio calculations are carried out at the MP2/aug-cc-pVTZ level. The results indicate that all optimized Y···N and H···H binding distances in the ternary complexes are smaller than the corresponding values in the binary systems. The calculated cooperative energies (E coop ) are between −0.20 kcal/mol in BrHS···NCH···HBeH and −3.29 kcal/mol in FHSe···NCH···HNa. For a given Y and M, the estimated E coop values increase as X = F > Cl > Br. In addition, the selenium-bonded complexes exibit larger E coop values than those of the sulfur-bonded counterparts. The cooperativity between Y···N and H···H interactions is further analyzed by quantum theory of atoms in molecules and natural bond orbital methods. Cooperative effects make an increase in the J(Y–N) and J(H–H) spin–spin coupling constants of the ternary complexes with respect to the binary systems.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| 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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 teacher head, 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".