Comparative semiempirical, ab initio, and DFT study on the thermodynamic properties of linear and branched PFSA/Fs, PFCA/Fs, and perhydroalkyl sulfonic acids, alkanes, and alcohols
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract A systematic and comprehensive semiempirical, Hartree-Fock (HF) ab initio, and B3LYP density functional theory (DFT) study was conducted on the relative thermodynamic properties of various linear and branched perfluorinated and perhydrogenated alkyl compounds. The semiempirical AM1, PM3, and PM6 methods all consistently and accurately predict that branched alkyl compounds will generally be more thermodynamically stable than their linear counterparts. In contrast, HF and B3LYP calculations with the 6-31G(d,p), 6-31++G(d,p), and 6-311++G(d,p) basis sets predict that linear isomers will be more stable than branched analogs. These different linear versus branched perfluoroalkyl/perhydroalkyl thermodynamic property trends between semiempirical and ab initio/DFT methods were evident in both gas and aqueous phase calculations. Comparison of experimentally determined thermodynamic properties for several classes of linear and branched alkanes and alcohols with values calculated at the PM6 and B3LYP/6-311++G(d,p) levels of theory supported the well known findings that such DFT and HF approaches incorrectly predict branched alkyl compounds will be less thermodynamically stable than linear isomers. Calculations at the MP2/6-311++G(d,p)//B3LYP/6-311++G(d,p) and M05-2X/6-311++G(d,p) levels of theory on a representative subset of the linear and branched perfluorinated compounds supported the thermodynamic conclusions from the PM6 method. Strong agreement between PM6 estimated thermodynamic properties and available experimental data supports use of this computational method for accurately calculating the well established higher thermodynamic stability of branched alkyl compounds. Branched perfluoroalkyl compounds are thus expected to be more thermodynamically stable than their linear analogs.
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 | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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 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".