MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2941125832 · doi:10.1071/ch19015

Theoretical Study on Pyramidal C7N6–H3R3 Molecules

2019· article· en· W2941125832 on OpenAlexaff
Bing He, Bingke Li, Hongwei Zhou

Bibliographic record

VenueAustralian Journal of Chemistry · 2019
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldChemistry
TopicCrystallography and molecular interactions
Canadian institutionsBC Research (Canada)
Fundersnot available
KeywordsChemistryCarbanionMoleculeQuantum chemistryValence (chemistry)Computational chemistryAb initio quantum chemistry methodsMacromoleculeCrystallographyIonization energySupramolecular chemistryStereochemistryIonizationOrganic chemistryIon

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The pyramidal molecule C7N6H6 and its nine symmetric tri-substituted derivatives C7N6–H3R3 (R = OH, F, CN, N3, NH2, NO2, N=NH, N2H3, and C=CH) were investigated computationally using the GAUSSIAN 09 program package. Natural bond orbital and atoms in molecules analyses, as well as valence bond theory were applied to investigate the bonding properties. In comparison to their well known analogues C6N7–R3, i.e. generic heptazines, it is found that these 10 molecules are all reactive. Further studies on the topological structures and ionization energy values indicate that the reactive site of the molecules is located at the carbon atom of the core frame. Even though C7N6–H3R3 are neutral molecules, the structures and properties of some are consistent with those of a carbanion, and indeed, they act like carbanions, or so-called carbanionoids. These carbanionoids may have an extensive impact in organic chemistry and organometallic chemistry.

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: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.009
Threshold uncertainty score0.030

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0090.001

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 head0.009
GPT teacher head0.267
Teacher spread0.257 · 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

Citations1
Published2019
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueAustralian Journal of ChemistrySame topicCrystallography and molecular interactionsFrench-language works237,207