MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4386820412 · doi:10.1080/00268976.2023.2259012

Spectra of Rg-water dimers in the region of the D <sub>2</sub> O ν <sub>3</sub> asymmetric stretch (Rg = Ar, Kr, Xe)

2023· article· en· W4386820412 on OpenAlexafffund
Robin Glorieux, A. J. Barclay, Clément Lauzin, A. R. W. McKellar, N. Moazzen‐Ahmadi

Bibliographic record

VenueMolecular Physics · 2023
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldChemistry
TopicSpectroscopy and Laser Applications
Canadian institutionsNational Research Council CanadaUniversity of Calgary
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of CanadaFonds De La Recherche Scientifique - FNRS
KeywordsAtomic physicsSpectral lineChemistryIonKryptonDeuteriumIsotopePhysicsXenonNuclear physics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Spectra of rare gas (Rg) – D2O dimers (Rg = Ar, Kr, Xe) are studied in the region of the D2O ν3 asymmetric stretch (≈2800 cm−1), using a rapid-scan tunable infrared optical parametric oscillator source to probe a pulsed supersonic slit jet expansion. Three bands are observed in each case, labelled according to the D2O rotational transition with which they correlate as: Σ(101) ← Σ(000), Π(101) ← Σ(000), and Σ(000) ← Σ(101). The Ar-D2O bands exhibit various perturbations and line broadening effects. For Kr-D2O, the Π(101) ← Σ(000) and Σ(000) ← Σ(101) bands are simple and relatively unperturbed with almost no resolved Kr isotope structure, while the Σ(101) ← Σ(000) band is highly perturbed and shows large isotope splittings. This latter perturbation is analyzed in detail with good results. For Xe-D2O, the experimental spectra are unfortunately weaker. Analysis of the Π(101) ← Σ(000) and Σ(000) ← Σ(101) bands is again relatively straightforward, but the Σ(101) ← Σ(000) band is even more perturbed than for Kr-D2O and its analysis proves impossible. Line broadening (for Ar-D2O) and vibrational frequency shift effects are described.

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 score0.004
Threshold uncertainty score0.682

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.002
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.000
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 head0.010
GPT teacher head0.225
Teacher spread0.215 · 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

Citations2
Published2023
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueMolecular PhysicsSame topicSpectroscopy and Laser ApplicationsFrench-language works237,207