MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2895935498 · doi:10.1107/s2056989018014329

Crystal structure and optical spectroscopic analyses of (<i>E</i>)-3-(1<i>H</i>-indol-2-yl)-1-(4-nitrophenyl)prop-2-en-1-one hemihydrate

2018· article· en· W2895935498 on OpenAlexaff
Muhamad Fikri Zaini, Ibrahim Abdul Razak, Wan M. Khairul, Suhana Arshad

Bibliographic record

VenueActa Crystallographica Section E Crystallographic Communications · 2018
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMaterials Science
TopicNonlinear Optical Materials Research
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Toronto
FundersUniversiti Sains MalaysiaMinistry of Higher Education, Malaysia
KeywordsDihedral angleRing (chemistry)MoleculeCrystallographyCrystal structureHydrogen bondChemistryDensity functional theoryIntermolecular forceBenzeneHOMO/LUMONitroCrystal (programming language)StereochemistryComputational chemistry

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The asymmetric unit of the title compound, 2C17H12N2O3·H2O comprises two molecules of (E)-3-(1H-indol-2-yl)-1-(4-nitrophenyl)prop-2-en-1-one and a water molecule. The main molecule adopts an s-cis configuration with respect to the C=O and C=C bonds. The dihedral angle between the indole ring system and the nitro-substituted benzene ring is 37.64 (16)°. In the crystal, molecules are linked by O—-H...O and N—H...O hydrogen bonds, forming chains along [010]. In addition, weak C—H...O, C—H...π and π–π interactions further link the structure into a three-dimensional network. The optimized structure was generated theoretically via a density functional theory (DFT) approach at the B3LYP/6–311 G++(d,p) basis level and the HOMO–LUMO behaviour was elucidated to determine the energy gap. The obtained values of 2.70 eV (experimental) and 2.80 eV (DFT) are desirable for optoelectronic applications. The intermolecular interactions were quantified and analysed using Hirshfeld surface analysis.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: Bench or experimental
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.002
Threshold uncertainty score0.003

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.035
GPT teacher head0.324
Teacher spread0.289 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designBench or experimental
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations4
Published2018
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueActa Crystallographica Section E Crystallographic CommunicationsSame topicNonlinear Optical Materials ResearchFrench-language works237,207