Calculated solvation and ionization energies for thousands of organic molecules relevant to battery design
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract We present high-quality reference data for two fundamentally important groups of molecular properties related to a compound’s utility as a lithium battery electrolyte. The first property is energy changes associated with charge excitations of molecules, namely ionization potential and electron affinity. They were estimated for 7000 randomly chosen molecules with up to 9 non-hydrogen atoms C, N, O, and F (QM9 dataset) using the DH-HF, DF-HF-CABS, PNO-LMP2-F12, and PNO-LCCSD(T)-F12 methods as implemented in the Molpro software, and the aug-cc-pVTZ basis set. Additionally, we provide the corresponding atomization energies at these levels of theory, as well as the CPU time and disk space used during the calculations. The second property is solvation energies for 39 different solvents, which we estimate for 18361 molecules connected to battery design (Electrolyte Genome Project dataset), 309463 randomly chosen molecules with up to 17 non-hydrogen atoms C, N, O, S, and halogens (GDB17 dataset), as well as 88418 atoms-in-molecules of the ZINC database of commercially available compounds and 37772 atoms-in-molecules of GDB17. For these calculations we used the COnductor-like Screening MOdel for Real Solvents (COSMO-RS) method; we additionally provide estimates of gas-phase atomization energies, as well as information about conformers considered during the COSMO-RS calculations, namely coordinates, energies, and dipole moments.
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 | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| 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) | 0.007 | 0.002 |
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".