MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2493541266 · doi:10.1021/acs.jpcb.6b05291

Birth of NaCl Crystals: Insights from Molecular Simulations

2016· article· en· W2493541266 on OpenAlexafffund
G. Lanaro, G. N. Patey

Bibliographic record

VenueThe Journal of Physical Chemistry B · 2016
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPhysics and Astronomy
TopicSpectroscopy and Quantum Chemical Studies
Canadian institutionsUniversity of British Columbia
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada
KeywordsNucleationCluster (spacecraft)SupersaturationCrystallinityChemical physicsMolecular dynamicsStatistical physicsCrystal (programming language)Materials scienceCrystallographyChemistryThermodynamicsPhysicsComputer scienceComputational chemistry

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Molecular dynamics simulations are used to investigate the factors that influence the nucleation of NaCl crystals in a supersaturated aqueous solution. We describe a methodology for detecting solidlike NaCl clusters (potential nuclei) and following their evolution in time until they achieve nucleation (which is very rare) or dissolve back into solution. Through an analysis of cluster lifetimes and multiple nucleation events, we demonstrate that cluster size is not the only property that influences cluster stability and the probability of achieving nucleation. We introduce a parameter called cluster crystallinity, which is a measure of the solidlike order in a particular cluster. We show that cluster order (as measured by this parameter) has a strong influence on the lifetime and nucleation probability of clusters of equal sizes, with the lifetime and probability of nucleation increasing with increasing crystallinity. These observations remain true for clusters as small as six ions, showing that the structural factors are important even at the earliest stages of crystal birth.

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 score0.045
Threshold uncertainty score0.257

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 head0.007
GPT teacher head0.246
Teacher spread0.239 · 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

Citations57
Published2016
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueThe Journal of Physical Chemistry BSame topicSpectroscopy and Quantum Chemical StudiesFrench-language works237,207