A chemical perspective on high pressure crystal structures and properties
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The general availability of third generation synchrotron sources has ushered in a new era of high pressure research. The crystal structure of materials under compression can now be determined by X-ray diffraction using powder samples and, more recently, from multi-nano single crystal diffraction. Concurrently, these experimental advancements are accompanied by a rapid increase in computational capacity and capability, enabling the application of sophisticated quantum calculations to explore a variety of material properties. One of the early surprises is the finding that simple metallic elements do not conform to the general expectation of adopting 3D close-pack structures at high pressure. Instead, many novel open structures have been identified with no known analogues at ambient pressure. The occurrence of these structural types appears to be random with no rules governing their formation. The adoption of an open structure at high pressure suggested the presence of directional bonds. Therefore, a localized atomic hybrid orbital description of the chemical bonding may be appropriate. Here, the theoretical foundation and experimental evidence supporting this approach to the elucidation of the high pressure crystal structures of group I and II elements and polyhydrides are reviewed. It is desirable and advantageous to extend and apply established chemical principles to the study of the chemistry and chemical bonding of materials at high pressure.
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.
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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 it