MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3093142947 · doi:10.1002/jcc.26431

Bonding and metastability for Group 12 dications

2020· article· en· W3093142947 on OpenAlexafffund
SeyedAbdolreza Sadjadi, Chérif F. Matta, Ian Hamilton

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Computational Chemistry · 2020
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPhysics and Astronomy
TopicAdvanced Chemical Physics Studies
Canadian institutionsWilfrid Laurier UniversityMount Saint Vincent UniversityDalhousie University
FundersCanada Foundation for InnovationNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of CanadaWilfrid Laurier UniversityMount Saint Vincent University
KeywordsDelocalized electronMetastabilityChemistryExcited stateDensity functional theoryAtoms in moleculesBond-dissociation energySinglet stateElectron densityAtomic physicsElectron localization functionDissociation (chemistry)ElectronQuantumCrystallographyMoleculeComputational chemistryPhysicsPhysical chemistryQuantum mechanics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Electronic structure and bonding properties of the Group 12 dications M 2 2+ (M = Zn, Cd, Hg) are investigated and electron density‐derived quantities are used to characterize the metastability of these species. Of particular interest are the complementary descriptions afforded by the Laplacian of the electron density ∇ 2 ρ ( r ) and the one‐electron Bohm quantum potential ( Q = ) along the bond path. Further, properties derived from the pair density including the localization‐delocalization matrices (LDMs) and the interacting quantum atoms (IQA) energies are analyzed within the framework of the quantum theory of atoms in molecules (QTAIM). From the crossing points of the singlet (ground) and triplet (excited) potential energy curves, the barriers for dissociation (BFD) are estimated to be 25.2 kcal/mol (1.09 eV) for Zn 2 2+ , 22.8 kcal/mol (0.99 eV) for Cd 2 2+ , and 26.4 kcal/mol (1.14 eV) for Hg 2 2+ . For comparison and benchmarking purposes, the case of N 2 2+ is considered as a texbook example of metastability. At the equilibrium geometries, LDMs, which are used here as an electronic fingerprinting tool, discriminate and group together Group 12 M 2 2+ from its isoelectronic Group 11 M 2 . While “classical” bonding indices are inconclusive in establishing regions of metastability in the bonding, it is shown that the one‐electron Bohm quantum potential is promising in this regard.

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 distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation 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 score0.910
Threshold uncertainty score0.239

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

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

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.

Opus teacher head0.019
GPT teacher head0.274
Teacher spread0.256 · 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 teacher head, 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

Citations6
Published2020
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Computational ChemistrySame topicAdvanced Chemical Physics StudiesFrench-language works237,207