MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2327380151 · doi:10.1021/jp300029z

Using Systematic Comparisons of 2D and 3D Structures To Reveal Principles of Molecular Organization. Tetraesters of Linear Bisisophthalic Acids

2012· article· en· W2327380151 on OpenAlexafffund
Hui Zhou, Thierry Maris, James D. Wuest

Bibliographic record

VenueThe Journal of Physical Chemistry C · 2012
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicSurface Chemistry and Catalysis
Canadian institutionsUniversité de Montréal
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of CanadaCanada Research Chairs
KeywordsIntermolecular forceTopology (electrical circuits)AffinitiesHydrogen bondHomology (biology)Network topologyChemical physicsChemistryMoleculeComputer scienceStereochemistryMathematicsAmino acidCombinatorics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Linear bisisophthalic acids 1 and 2 and analogous structures are known to be adsorbed on graphite to give nanopatterns that are programmed by the concerted effects of topology and hydrogen bonding. For comparison, we have now studied the corresponding tetraesters 3 – 7, which have similar topologies and affinities for graphite but cannot form strong intermolecular interactions. As a result, they fail to crystallize in 2D and 3D according to consistent patterns. The sharply contrasting behavior of the tetraacids and tetraesters provides compelling evidence for the hypothesis that molecular organization is best controlled in both 2D and 3D by using topology and strong directional interactions in tandem to control the relative orientation of neighbors. When topology and dominant intermolecular interactions are in harmony, then organization can be expected to follow reliable patterns within a related series of compounds, and structures in 2D and 3D can be designed to show high levels of homology.

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 score0.084
Threshold uncertainty score0.322

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 head0.020
GPT teacher head0.252
Teacher spread0.232 · 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

Citations13
Published2012
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueThe Journal of Physical Chemistry CSame topicSurface Chemistry and CatalysisFrench-language works237,207