MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2903363466 · doi:10.5539/ijc.v10n4p130

The Capping Theory of Chemical Clusters Based on 12N/14N Series

2018· article· en· W2903363466 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Enos Masheija Rwantale Kiremire

Bibliographic record

VenueInternational Journal of Chemistry · 2018
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicBoron Compounds in Chemistry
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsChemistryValence electronCluster (spacecraft)Series (stratigraphy)Valence (chemistry)Main group elementTransition metalElectronGroup (periodic table)CrystallographyAtomic physicsComputational chemistryPhysicsQuantum mechanicsOrganic chemistry

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The genesis of chemical clusters of the transition and main group elements has been established. The base-line for cluster valence electrons has been demarcated with help of capping series. Using the base-line as a reference, the formulas of fragments and clusters were generated. Also a simple general formula for calculating cluster valence electrons for systems ranging from a single to multi-skeletal element clusters was identified. The concepts of the existence of nuclei in clusters and some having black-holes were well established. The capping principle was extended to the main group and transition elements of the periodic table and a difference between metals and non-metals was discerned. The skeletal elements of clusters whose series have advanced beyond closo baseline level S=4n+2 can be separated into two broad groups, namely those which follow the closo series(nucleus) and those which follow the capping series.

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: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: Theoretical or conceptual
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.010
Threshold uncertainty score0.032

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.002
Scholarly communication0.0010.002
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0100.001

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 head0.013
GPT teacher head0.288
Teacher spread0.275 · 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 designTheoretical or conceptual
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 venueInternational Journal of ChemistrySame topicBoron Compounds in ChemistryFrench-language works237,207