Fluorine chemistry at extreme conditions: Possible synthesis of $HgF_4$
Bibliographic record
Abstract
By irradiating a pressurized mixture of a fluorine-bearing compound ($XeF_2$) and $HgF_2$ with synchrotron hard x-rays (>7 keV) inside a diamond anvil cell, we have observed dramatic changes in the far-infrared spectrum within the 30-35 GPa pressure range which suggest that we may have formed $HgF_4$ in the following way: $XeF_2 \xrightarrow{hv} Xe + F_2$ (photochemically) and $HgF_2 + F_2 \rightarrow HgF_4$ (30 GPa < P < 35 GPa). This lends credence to recent theoretical calculations by Botana et al. that suggest that Hg may behave as a transition metal at high pressure in an environment with an excess of molecular fluorine. The spectral changes were observed to be reversible during pressure cycling above and below the above mentioned pressure range until a certain point when we suspect that molecular fluorine diffused out of the sample at lower pressure. Upon pressure release, $HgF_2$ and trace $XeF_2$ were observed to be remaining in the sample chamber suggesting that much of the $Xe$ and $F_2$ diffused and leaked out from the sample chamber. Received: 29 October 2018, Accepted: 18 January 2019; Edited by: A. Goñi, A. Cantarero, J. S. Reparaz; DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.4279/PIP.110001 Cite as: M Pravica, S Schyck, B Harris, P Cifligu, E Kim, B Billinghurst, Papers in Physics 11, 110001 (2019). This paper, by M Pravica, S Schyck, B Harris, P Cifligu, E Kim, B Billinghurst, is licensed under the Creative Commons Attribution License 4.0.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| 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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".