QUANTUM CHEMICAL CALCULATIONS OF TORSIONALLY MEDIATED HYPERFINE SPLITTINGS IN STATES OF E SYMMETRY OF ACETALDEHYDE (CH3CHO)
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Hyperfine splittings in methanol have been revisited in three recent publications. (i) Coudert et al. [JCP 143 (2015) 044304] published an analysis of splittings observed in the low-J range. They calculated 32 spin-rotation, 32 spin-spin, and 16 spin-torsion hyperfine constants using the ACES2 package. Three of these constants were adjusted to fit hyperfine patterns for 12 transitions. (ii) Three present authors and collaborators [JCP 145 (2016) 024307] analyzed medium to high-J experimental Lamb-dip measurements in methanol and presented a theoretical spin-rotation explanation that was based on torsionally mediated spin-rotation hyperfine operators. These contain, in addition to the usual nuclear spin and overall rotational operators, factors in the torsional angle of the form e in . Such operators have non-zero matrix elements between the two components of a torsion-rotation tr E state, but have zero matrix elements within a tr A state. More than 55 hyperfine splittings were successfully fitted using three parameters and the fitted values agree well with ab initio values obtained in (i). (iii) Lankhaar et al. [JCP 145 (2016) 244301] published a reanalysis of the data set from (i), using CFOUR recalculated hyperfine constants based on their rederivation of the relevant expressions. They explain why their choice of fixed and floated parameters leads to numerical values for all parameters that seem to be more physical than those in (i). The results in (ii) raise the question of whether large torsionally-mediated spin-rotation splittings will occur in other methyl-rotor-containing molecules. This abstract presents ab initio calculations of torsionally mediated hyperfine splittings in the E states of acetaldehyde using the same three operators as in (ii) and spin-rotation constants computed by Gaussian09. We explored the first 13 K states for J from 10 to 40 and t = 0, 1, and 2. Our calculations indicate that hyperfine splittings in CH 3 CHO are just below current measurement capability. This conclusion is confirmed by available experimental measurements.
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 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) | 0.000 | 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 itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, 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".