MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3138080649 · doi:10.1039/d1cp00420d

Exploring the non-covalent interactions behind the formation of amine–water complexes: the case of <i>N</i>-allylmethylamine monohydrate

2021· article· en· W3138080649 on OpenAlexafffund
Weslley G. D. P. Silva, Tamanna Poonia, Jennifer van Wijngaarden

Bibliographic record

VenuePhysical Chemistry Chemical Physics · 2021
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldChemistry
TopicMolecular Spectroscopy and Structure
Canadian institutionsUniversity of WinnipegUniversity of Manitoba
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of CanadaUniversity of Manitoba
KeywordsConformational isomerismHydrogen bondCovalent bondChemistryQuantum chemicalAmine gas treatingSpectroscopyCrystallographyComputational chemistryChemical physicsMoleculeOrganic chemistryPhysics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

N quadrupolar nucleus. Quantum theory of atoms in molecules (QTAIM), non-covalent interaction (NCI) and natural bond orbital (NBO) analyses showed that the observed conformers of AMA-w are stabilized by two intermolecular interactions consisting of a dominant NH-O and a secondary C-HO hydrogen bond (HB) in which the water molecule acts simultaneously as a HB donor and acceptor. The HBs formed with water do not change the relative energy ordering of the most stable conformers of AMA but do affect the stability of higher energy conformations by disrupting the intramolecular forces responsible for their geometries. By comparing the intermolecular interaction energies with those of the monohydrates of the simplest primary (methylamine, MA), secondary (dimethylamine, DMA) and tertiary (trimethylamine, TMA) amines using symmetry-adapted perturbation theory (SAPT) calculations, we find that AMA forms the strongest bound complex with water. This is rationalized through the identification of subtle differences in stabilizing and destabilizing contributions across the amine-w series of complexes.

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: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: Bench or experimental
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.007
Threshold uncertainty score0.565

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 integrity0.0000.001
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 head0.029
GPT teacher head0.265
Teacher spread0.236 · 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 designBench or experimental
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
Published2021
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuePhysical Chemistry Chemical PhysicsSame topicMolecular Spectroscopy and StructureFrench-language works237,207