Bibliographic record
Abstract
Inspired from the work of Van Meersshe and Feneau-Dupont (1984), the ternary representation of the basic models in crystallography offers interesting perspectives to illustrate quantum orbitals, the classical S, P, D and F orbitals, by using a 3D representation of a trigonal system in place of the orthogonal system . On the other hand, the studies of the molecular orbitals of orthohydrogen (spins in the same sense) induces the hypothesis of a singularity zone between the atoms of hydrogen which could be a neutral zone favourable to the emergence of neutral particles and potentially can reorganize the repartition of electronic orbitals. Therefore, the nuclear spins can be related to the quantum orbitals distribution. Finally, by associating the ternary system in crystallisation with the orientation of nuclear spins and chemical bonds between the elements, we could work out a "trigonal" representation for the first elements of the periodic table, from hydrogen to calcium. The trigonal approach can facilitate the 3D representation of complex orbital systems. It offers a theoretical potential for crystallographic studies and it can support a large program of experimentation about the formation of the isotopes, the ionic character of covalent bonds and the gas state at low temperature for the electronegative elements of the periodic table.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.007 | 0.002 |
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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".