MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3158683753 · doi:10.1063/5.0048699

Conformational preferences of diallylamine: A rotational spectroscopic and theoretical study

2021· article· en· W3158683753 on OpenAlexafffund
Weslley G. D. P. Silva, Gabrielle Daudet, Sem Perez, Sven Thorwirth, Jennifer van Wijngaarden

Bibliographic record

VenueThe Journal of Chemical Physics · 2021
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldChemistry
TopicMolecular Spectroscopy and Structure
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Manitoba
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of CanadaDeutsche Forschungsgemeinschaft
KeywordsConformational isomerismChemistryHyperconjugationAb initioLone pairCrystallographyNatural bond orbitalBasis setHyperfine structureSpectroscopyComputational chemistryDensity functional theoryMoleculeAtomic physicsPhysics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The conformational space of diallylamine (DAA) was investigated using rotational spectroscopy from 7 to 19 GHz aided by quantum chemical calculations. Extensive conformational searches using density functional theory B3LYP-D3(BJ) and the ab initio MP2 method with the aug-cc-pVTZ basis set identified a total of 42 minima for DAA within ∼22 kJ mol−1. This reveals a strikingly rich conformational landscape for this secondary amine with two equivalent substituents. Experimentally, transitions belonging to four low energy conformers (I, II, III, and IV) were unequivocally assigned in the rotational spectrum, and their patterns were confirmed by the presence of the hyperfine structure owing to the 14N quadrupolar nucleus. The relative intensities of the observed transitions suggest a conformational energy ordering of I < II < III < IV. Natural bond orbital and non-covalent interaction calculations reveal that the geometric preferences for the observed conformers are governed by an interplay of subtle attractive interactions (including hyperconjugation involving the lone pair at nitrogen) and repulsive effects.

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 score0.063
Threshold uncertainty score0.460

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 head0.006
GPT teacher head0.247
Teacher spread0.241 · 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

Citations4
Published2021
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueThe Journal of Chemical PhysicsSame topicMolecular Spectroscopy and StructureFrench-language works237,207