Quantum Chemistry Calculation on Structures and NLO Cofficients of H_3PAuR Type Mononucleus Au(I) Complex
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Different quantum chemical ab initio methods and basis sets were adopted to investigate the structures and second-order nonlinear optical properties of H\-3PAuR type mononuclear Au(Ⅰ) complexes. The influence of different calculation methods and basis sets of Au on the calculation results were also discussed systematically. The results indicate that different methods give rise to a great effect on the structures and second-order nonlinear optical properties of mononuclear Au(Ⅰ) complexes. Herein, the length of coordinative bond of Au—P from HF method is shorter than that from DFT B3LYP and MP2 methods. Moreover, the second-order NLO coefficients obtained by DFT B3LYP and MP2 methods are two times larger than that by HF method. Based on the same methods, the coordinative bond length of Au—P decreased with increasing the number of d orbitals in the basis set of Au. Meanwhile, with increasing the basis sets of Au, the energy gap of frontier molecular orbitals decreased, which can be observed clearly for the SDD and CEP-121G basis sets. However, different basis sets have little influence on the second-order NLO coefficients. The difference of β_ μ value with different basis sets of Au for most of the molecules is less than 10%.
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.
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 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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 it