A revised nuclear quadrupole moment for aluminum: Theoretical nuclear quadrupole coupling constants of aluminum compounds
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The nuclear quadrupole moment of aluminum (27Al) has been re-evaluated by determining the electric field gradients at this nucleus for AlF and AlCl using the coupled cluster method with single, double, and perturbative triple excitations [CCSD(T)]/aug-cc-pwCVXZ (X = T and Q) accounting for both vibrational averaging and core–core/core–valence electron correlation and then comparing to the experimentally measured nuclear quadrupole coupling constants (NQCCs). The new recommended value is Q(27Al) = 148.2 ± 0.5 mb, which can be compared to the previous value of 146.6 ± 1 mb. Using the new value of the nuclear quadrupole moment, the accuracy is assessed for several computational approaches [i.e., Hartree–Fock, Møller–Plesset perturbation theory to the second order, quadratic configuration interaction with single and double excitations, CCSD, CCSD(T), and density functional theory (DFT) with the B3LYP, PBE0, and M06-2X functionals] and basis sets (the aug-cc-pVXZ and aug-cc-pwCVXZ families) for determining the nuclear quadruple coupling constants for AlCN, AlNC, AlSH, AlOH, and AlCCH, where experimental measurements are available. From the results at equilibrium geometries of the polyatomic molecules, it has been determined that (i) the CCSD(T)/aug-cc-pwCVXZ approach is needed to obtain results within 4% of the experimental measurements, (ii) typical DFT values are only within 10%–15% of the experimental measurements, and (iii) the aug-cc-pVXZ family of basis sets is not recommended for computing the electric field gradients at aluminum. The present results also suggest that the NQCC for AlOH should be remeasured. Using the recommended CCSD(T)/aug-cc-pwCVXZ approach, the equilibrium geometries and corresponding NQCCs for AlCH3 and AlCCCN were determined, and the NQCCs are in excellent agreement with previously reported experimental values.
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 | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.004 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.006 | 0.002 |
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".