Actinium coordination chemistry: A density functional theory study with monodentate and bidentate ligands
Bibliographic record
Abstract
In the current study, the coordination chemistry of nine-coordinate Ac(III) complexes with 35 monodentate and bidentate ligands was investigated using density functional theory (DFT) in terms of their geometries, charges, reaction energies, and bonding interactions. The energy decomposition analysis with naturals orbitals for chemical valence (EDA-NOCV) and the quantum theory of atoms in molecules (QTAIM) were employed as analysis methods. Trivalent Ac exhibits the highest affinities toward hard acids (such as charged oxophilic donors, fluoride), so its classification as a hard acid is justified. Natural population analysis quantified the involvement of 5f orbitals on Ac to be about 30% of total valence electron natural configuration indicating that Ac is a member of the actinide series. Pearson correlation coefficients were used to study the pairwise correlations among the bond lengths, ΔG reaction energies, charges on Ac and donor atoms, and data from EDA-NOCV and QTAIM. Strong correlations and anticorrelations were found between Voronoi charges on donor atoms with ΔG, EDA-NOCV interaction energies and QTAIM bond critical point densities.
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 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| 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 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".