MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4405650678 · doi:10.26493/1855-3974.3282.6ea

Tight upper bounds for the p-anionic Clar number of fullerenes

2024· article· en· W4405650678 on OpenAlexafffund
Aaron Slobodin, Wendy Myrvold, Gary MacGillivray, Patrick W. Fowler

Bibliographic record

VenueArs Mathematica Contemporanea · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldChemistry
TopicFullerene Chemistry and Applications
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Victoria
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of CanadaLeverhulme Trust
KeywordsFullereneCombinatoricsMathematicsUpper and lower boundsChemistryMathematical analysisOrganic chemistry

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

A fullerene is an all-carbon molecule with a polyhedral structure whereeach atom is bonded to three other atoms and each face is either apentagon or a hexagon. Fullerenes correspond to 3-regular planar graphswhose faces have sizes 5 or 6. The p-anionic Clar number C_(p)(G) of afullerene G is equal to p + h, where h is maximized over all choices ofp + h independent faces (exactly p pentagons and h hexagons) thedeletion of whose vertices leave a graph with a perfect matching. Thisdefinition is motivated by the chemical observation that pentagonalrings can accommodate an extra electron, so that the pentagons of afullerene with charge −p, compete with the hexagons to host ‘Clarsextets’ of six electrons, and pentagons will preferentially acquire thep excess electrons of the anion. Tight upper bounds are established for the p-anionic Clar number offullerenes for p > 0. The upper bounds are derived via graph theoreticarguments and new results on minimal cyclic-k-edge cutsets in IPRfullerenes (fullerenes that have all pentagons pairwise disjoint). Thesebounds are shown to be tight by infinite families of fullerenes thatachieve them.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.003
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.025
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: Theoretical or conceptual
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.015
Threshold uncertainty score0.049

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.025
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0030.002
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.001
Bibliometrics0.0050.004
Science and technology studies0.0040.005
Scholarly communication0.0070.014
Open science0.0040.007
Research integrity0.0030.007
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0150.003

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 head0.026
GPT teacher head0.292
Teacher spread0.266 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designTheoretical or conceptual
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

Citations0
Published2024
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueArs Mathematica ContemporaneaSame topicFullerene Chemistry and ApplicationsFrench-language works237,207