Halogen bonding, chalcogen bonding, pnictogen bonding, tetrel bonding: origins, current status and discussion
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
The role of the closing lecture in a Faraday Discussion is to summarise the contributions made to the Discussion over the course of the meeting and in so doing capture the main themes that have arisen. This article is based upon my Closing Remarks Lecture at the 203 <sup>rd</sup> Faraday Discussion meeting on Halogen Bonding in Supramolecular and Solid State Chemistry, held in Ottawa, Canada, on 10–12 <sup>th</sup> July, 2017. The Discussion included papers on fundamentals and applications of halogen bonding in the solid state and solution phase. Analogous interactions involving main group elements outside group 17 were also examined. In the closing lecture and in this article these contributions have been grouped into the four themes: (a) fundamentals, (b) beyond the halogen bond, (c) characterisation, and (d) applications. The lecture and paper also include a short reflection on past work that has a bearing on the Discussion.
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) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.004 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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