New assignments of Raman spectra of tetrahedra and the effects of electronegativity. I. P4O10 and Si-containing molecules
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Our new density functional theory calculations by Gaussian reproduce the bond lengths and Raman spectra of a number of model tetrahedral Si and P compounds [the ten compounds in the SiHxD4−x and SiFxCl4−x (x = 0–4) series, and the tetramer P4O10]. The number of symmetric A1 peaks is determined by group theory, and the center of mass is especially important for the assignment of the three A1 peaks for P4O10 to the two P–O stretches and the O–P–O bend. Additional Gaussian calculations on isolated C3v PO4 tetrahedra, using the P–O bond lengths and O–P–O bond angles from the P4O10 optimization, also reproduce the three peak P4O10 Raman spectra and provide an important guide to the assignment of the two low energy peaks at ∼500 and ∼700 cm−1 to the P–BO (BO = P–O–P) stretch and BO–P–BO bend, respectively, in contrast to all earlier assignments. In the SiFxCl4−x series, there is a regular increase in the Si–F A1 frequency and a decrease in the Si–Cl A1 frequency across the series. Similar trends are seen in the SiClx(CH3)4−x series, and these trends are due to changes in the electron densities in the tetrahedron when an electronegative F or Cl is replaced by a less electronegative Cl or CH3, as measured by previous Si 2p, F 1s, Cl 2p, and C 1s x-ray photoelectron spectroscopy. These considerations serve as a guide for the interpretation of the Raman spectra of silicate glasses in Paper II [Bancroft et al., AIP Adv. 13, 125216 (2023)].
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) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.006 | 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".