Molecular Electrostatic Potential as a Predictor of Supramolecular Synthons in Non‐Hydrogen‐Bonded Systems: Application to Heavier p‐Block Systems
Bibliographic record
Abstract
We show that the α i and β j parameters developed by Hunter to describe the hydrogen‐bond donor and acceptor properties of particular functional groups can be successfully applied to understand favourable intermolecular interactions between molecules containing heavier p‐block elements, notwithstanding the increasing dispersion terms associated with these elements. Although dispersion is an important contribution to the dimerisation enthalpy of dithiadiazolyls, we show that many aspects of the crystal packing of dimers can successfully be interpreted through such an electrostatic analysis. This approach is exemplified through analysis of the crystal structures of a series of fluoro‐ and trifluoromethyl‐substituted 1,2,3,5‐dithiadiazolyl radicals. Comparison of fluoro‐ and trifluoromethyl‐substituted aryl dithiadiazolyls reveals that the trifluoromethyl group has a pronounced electron‐withdrawing effect, enhancing the electrostatic contribution, but also adding steric bulk. The possible intermolecular interactions between these molecules are close in energy, resulting in structural diversity and at least one case of polymorphism. Despite neglecting the significant favourable dimerisation enthalpy in the analysis of the electrostatic potential, this approach provides a very clear rationalisation of many aspects of the observed crystal structures.||||||
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 | 0.001 |
| 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".