On the Nature of Hydrogen–Hydrogen Bonding
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This chapter reviews the recent experimental and computational evidence that support the concept of “hydrogen–hydrogen (or H–H) bonding” which involves the interaction of two neutral hydrogen atoms or two hydrogen atoms bearing charges of the same sign, as a new class of weak interactions. The H–H bonding interaction gains importance due to its utility in rationalizing the stability of several systems where no other attractive interactions are involved such as crystalline structures of n-alkanes and polyhedranes. H–H bonding complements the list of long-known interactions that stabilize the structures of proteins and other macromolecules such as hydrogen-bonding and van der Waals interactions that play a crucial role in the description of chemical structural, stability, and reactivity. The elucidation of this weak interaction from the standpoint of the Quantum Theory of Atoms in Molecules (QTAIM) leads to a quantitative description that is testable by experiment, and provides new insight that broadens and expands our understanding of weak interactions, ubiquitous as they are in nature.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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 | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.008 | 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 teacher head, 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".