NMR crystallography of zeolites: How far can we go without diffraction data?
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Nuclear magnetic resonance (NMR) crystallography—an approach to structure determination that seeks to integrate solid‐state NMR spectroscopy, diffraction, and computation methods—has emerged as an effective strategy to determine structures of difficult‐to‐characterize materials, including zeolites and related network materials. This paper explores how far it is possible to go in determining the structure of a zeolite framework from a minimal amount of input information derived only from solid‐state NMR spectroscopy. It is shown that the framework structure of the fluoride‐containing and tetramethylammonium‐templated octadecasil clathrasil material can be solved from the 1D 29 Si NMR spectrum and a single 2D 29 Si NMR correlation spectrum alone, without the space group and unit cell parameters normally obtained from diffraction data. The resulting NMR‐solved structure is in excellent agreement with the structures determined previously by diffraction methods. It is anticipated that NMR crystallography strategies like this will be useful for structure determination of other materials, which cannot be solved from diffraction methods alone.
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 | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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 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".