MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W7140627324 · doi:10.1333/s00897112371a

“Recharging“ Group Electronegativities

2011· article· en· W7140627324 on OpenAlexaff
Matthew Moran, John-Paul Jones, Alan A. Wilson, Sylvain Houle, G. K. Surya Prakash, George A. Olah, Neil Vasdev

Bibliographic record

VenueThe Chemical Educator · 2011
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldChemistry
TopicHistory and advancements in chemistry
Canadian institutionsCentre for Addiction and Mental Health
Fundersnot available
KeywordsElectronegativitySubstituentScalingGroup (periodic table)Metric (unit)Charge (physics)Simple (philosophy)

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Group electronegativity (gEN) is a fundamental concept of chemistry, relating to acidity, chemical reactivity, activating groups, and protecting groups. Although several empirical and computational methods have been devised for determining gEN, there is no straightforward computational method available to determine these values. We here revisit the determination of gENs using partial charges (“recharging”), computed at a high level of theory using the natural charge of a group (proton, methyl, vinyl, phenyl) bound to the substituent of interest and correlating the values with Pauling electronegativities. The results were found to be in good agreement with previous experimental and computational results. The values also qualitatively reproduced expected electronegativity trends. Furthermore, this work provides the first attempt to compare literature values by scaling them to a single metric (Pauling electronegativities). The method employed is simple and convenient, and could prove to be useful to chemists for determining the gEN of a substituent of interest, or by chemical educators as an assignment or laboratory exercise in a computational chemistry course.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
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: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.004
Threshold uncertainty score0.013

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.002
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0000.001
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 head0.026
GPT teacher head0.231
Teacher spread0.204 · 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
Published2011
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueThe Chemical EducatorSame topicHistory and advancements in chemistryFrench-language works237,207