MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4414375135 · doi:10.1080/00268976.2025.2553621

Complexes of ozone with larger molecules

2025· article· en· W4414375135 on OpenAlexafffund
Friedrich Grein

Bibliographic record

VenueMolecular Physics · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEarth and Planetary Sciences
TopicAtmospheric Ozone and Climate
Canadian institutionsUniversity of New Brunswick
FundersAlliance de recherche numérique du Canada
KeywordsTriatomic moleculeOzoneDissociation (chemistry)MoleculeOxygenDimerHydrogen bondHydrogen

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Using the coupled cluster singles, doubles and perturbative triples method with augmented quadruple–zeta basis sets, structures and properties were found for complexes of ozone with triatomic molecules as well as with ammonia and methane, all molecules being present in the atmosphere. The largest dissociation energies were obtained for O3–NH3 (917.5 cm−1), O3–H2O (787.2 cm−1), O3–SO2 (716.9 cm−1), O3–N2O (688.0 cm−1), O3–HCN (659.0 cm−1), O3–CO2 (651.7 cm−1) and for the ozone dimer (610.7 cm−1). Large shifts in harmonic vibrational frequencies were found for the ozone dimer, with a red shift of 45 cm−1 and a blue shift of 19 cm−1 for the antisymmetric stretching band of ozone. Large frequency shifts are also seen for complexes of ozone with HCN, smaller ones for complexes with NH3, H2O and N2O. Hydrogen bonding is compared with oxygen bonding. Hydrogen bonding of the CH4, NH3, H2O and HF complexes with ozone is contrasted to hydrogen bonding with the oxygen molecule. Dissociation energies for complexes of ozone with HF, H2O and NH3 are about four times larger than for corresponding complexes with the oxygen molecule.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation 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 score0.015

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0040.000

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 head0.006
GPT teacher head0.203
Teacher spread0.197 · 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 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

Citations0
Published2025
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueMolecular PhysicsSame topicAtmospheric Ozone and ClimateFrench-language works237,207