MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2389150465 · doi:10.1063/1.4948809

Dirac-Fock-Breit-Gaunt calculations for tungsten hexacarbonyl W(CO)6

2016· article· en· W2389150465 on OpenAlexaff
Gulzari Malli

Bibliographic record

VenueThe Journal of Chemical Physics · 2016
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPhysics and Astronomy
TopicAdvanced Chemical Physics Studies
Canadian institutionsSimon Fraser University
FundersOffice of Science
KeywordsAtomic physicsRelativistic quantum chemistryBond energyBond lengthChemistryTungstenPhysicsMoleculeCrystallographyCrystal structure

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The first all-electron fully relativistic Dirac-Fock-Breit-Gaunt (DFBG), Dirac-Fock (DF), and nonrelativistic (NR) Hartree-Fock (HF) calculations are reported for octahedral (Oh) tungsten hexacarbonyl W(CO)6. Our DF and NR HF calculations predict atomization energy of 73.76 and 70.33 eV, respectively. The relativistic contribution of ∼3.4 eV to the atomization energy of W(CO)6 is fairly significant. The DF and NR energy for the reaction W + 6CO → W(CO)6 is calculated as -7.90 and -8.86 eV, respectively. The mean bond energy predicted by our NR and DF calculations is 142.5 kJ/mol and 177.5 kJ/mol, respectively, and our predicted DF mean bond energy is in excellent agreement with the experimental value of 179 kJ/mol quoted in the literature. The relativistic effects contribute ∼35 kJ/mol to the mean bond energy and the calculated BSSE is 1.6 kcal/mol, which indicates that the triple zeta basis set used here is fairly good. The mean bond energy and the atomization energy calculated in our DFBG SCF calculations, which include variationally both the relativistic and magnetic Breit effects, is 157.4 kJ/mol and 68.84 eV, respectively. The magnetic Breit effects lead to a decrease of ∼20 kJ/mol and ∼4.9 eV for the mean bond energy and atomization energy, respectively, for W(CO)6. Our calculated magnetic Breit interaction energy of -9.79 eV for the energy of reaction (ΔE) for W + 6CO → W(CO)6 is lower by ∼1.90 eV as compared to the corresponding DF value (ΔE) and contributes significantly to the ΔE. A detailed discussion is presented of electronic structure, bonding, and molecular energy levels at various levels of theory for W(CO)6.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.033
Threshold uncertainty score0.065

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.002
Science and technology studies0.0020.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0020.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0040.001

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.

Opus teacher head0.018
GPT teacher head0.281
Teacher spread0.264 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designSimulation or modeling
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

Citations4
Published2016
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueThe Journal of Chemical PhysicsSame topicAdvanced Chemical Physics StudiesFrench-language works237,207