High resolution microwave and infrared spectroscopy of four-membered heterocyclic compounds
Bibliographic record
Abstract
High resolution molecular spectroscopic techniques are useful tools to accurately probe energy differences between quantum states of molecules. These energy levels are inherently dependent on the underlying potential functions, which ultimately govern the structures and dynamics of molecules. Thus, the detailed characterization of potential energy profiles through molecular spectroscopy provides important information about molecular properties. Given the increased structural and dynamic complexity of large molecules, small compounds serve as excellent prototypes to establish quantum mechanical models that accurately characterize quantum states and ultimately potential energy functions of various molecular classes. This thesis describes the use of rotational and rovibrational spectroscopy to probe one such class: four-membered heterocycles. Rotationally-resolved vibrational spectra of four-membered rings including β-propiolactone (c-C3H4O2), 3-oxetanone (c-C3H4O2), azetidine (c-C3H6N) and silacyclobutane (c-C3H8Si) were recorded below 1200 cm-1 using a Fourier transform infrared spectrometer (FTIR) with synchrotron light at the far infrared beamline of the Canadian Light Source (CLS). Additionally, Fourier transform microwave (FTMW) spectroscopy was used to study the pure rotational spectra of β-propiolactone and silacyclobutane for the first time. This allowed the accurate characterization of the ground vibrational state and molecular structure in support of the rovibrational analysis. The far infrared vibrational modes of these four molecules were analyzed individually initially and followed by a global fit of all observed transitions of each molecule. Unique spectroscopic signatures arising from Coriolis coupling(β-propiolactone, 3-oxetanone), tunneling motions (azetidine, silacyclobutane) and the large amplitude ring puckering vibration (3-oxetanone, azetidine, silacyclobutane) were revealed and treated. The resultant Hamiltonian models used for each molecule account for the observed spectra as the spectroscopic constants are consistent across the ground state and all vibrationally excited states studied. Collectively, these studies have provided a highly effective working protocol for the treatment of high resolution rovibrational data to model the dynamic behaviour of real molecules.
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) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| 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 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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".