Complexes of LiF and LiCl with LiF, LiCl, LiH, HF, HCl, H<sub>2</sub>, Li<sub>2</sub>, F<sub>2</sub>, Cl<sub>2</sub>, FCl, H<sub>2</sub>O and NH<sub>3</sub>. Structures, energies and vibrational frequencies
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Using coupled cluster calculations with quadruple-zeta basis sets optimal structures and dissociation energies were obtained for complexes of LiF and LiCl with LiH, HF, HCl, H2, Li2, F2, Cl2, FCl, H2O and NH3. Structures for LiF-LiF and LiCl-LiCl have D2h symmetry, while the structure of LiF-LiCl, as well as structures of LiF and LiCl with LiH, HF and Li2 are cyclic, with C2v symmetry. Most other systems have Cs symmetry, many in near-cyclic form. The largest dissociation energy of 21,304 cm−1 was obtained for LiF-LiF. Dissociation energies for LiCl-LiCl and for cyclic C2v systems range from about 10,000 to 20,000 cm−1. For cyclic systems with D2h and C2v symmetries harmonic vibrational frequencies cannot be related to monomer frequencies. Their higher frequencies, however, are close to frequencies of triatomic Li-Y-Li, with Y = H, F, Cl, and to frequencies of F-H-F-.
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) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.010 | 0.001 |
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".