MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4293479590 · doi:10.1002/ange.202208152

Be<sub>4</sub>B<sub>12</sub><sup>+</sup>: A Covalently Bonded Archimedean Beryllo‐Borospherene

2022· article· en· W4293479590 on OpenAlexaff
Xue Dong, Yu‐qian Liu, Xinbo Liu, Sudip Pan, Zhong‐hua Cui, Gabriel Merino

Bibliographic record

VenueAngewandte Chemie · 2022
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMaterials Science
TopicBoron and Carbon Nanomaterials Research
Canadian institutionsMinistry of Education and Child Care
FundersNational Natural Science Foundation of China
KeywordsBerylliumCovalent bondAtomic orbitalCrystallographyBoronChemistryAtom (system on chip)Cluster (spacecraft)Atomic physicsTetrahedronMolecular orbitalExcited stateElectronPhysicsMoleculeNuclear physics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract A new class of beryllium‐boron clusters, beryllo‐borospherene, is described herein theoretically. When beryllium is gradually added to the B 12 motif, it undergoes drastic structural modifications. The global minimum of the Be 4 B 12 + cluster is an Archimedean beryllo‐borospherene in a 2 A 1 electronic ground state, composed of four boron triangles linked at each corner, resulting in a truncated tetrahedron with four B 6 rings capped with four beryllium atoms. Beryllium forms strong bonding with the boron clusters through strong electrostatic and covalent interactions. For instance, the bonding between a beryllium atom and Be 3 B 12 unit is best described as a Be + fragment in a 2 P excited state forming a strong and polarized electron‐sharing bond with Be 3 B 12 , followed by several dative interactions by employing its vacant s, p, and very high‐lying d orbitals. Counterintuitively, for an s‐block element, the p orbitals of beryllium are the most crucial atomic orbitals for bonding rather than s orbitals.

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)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow), Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)
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 score0.009
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0040.000

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 head0.022
GPT teacher head0.246
Teacher spread0.224 · 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.

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

Citations2
Published2022
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueAngewandte ChemieSame topicBoron and Carbon Nanomaterials ResearchFrench-language works237,207