Found Chem

https://doi.org/10.1007/s10698-018-9319-6

The network theory: a new language for speaking

about chemical elements relations through stoichiometric
binary compounds

Rosana del P. Suárez1

© Springer Nature B.V. 2018

Abstract  Traditionally the study of chemical elements has been limited to well-known
concepts like the periodic properties and chemical families. However, current information
shows a new and rich language that allows us to observe relations in the elements that are
not limited to their positions in the table. These relations are evident when reactions are
represented through networks, as in the case of similar reactivity of organic compounds
sharing functional groups. For the past two decades, it has been argued that network reac-
tions may be considered the core of chemistry. This network, which constitutes the basic set
of chemical knowledge, provides the basis for classification and delivers routes to obtain
new and known substances. In order to provide an example, we constructed and analyzed
a network of chemical elements from the formation of stoichiometric binary compounds,
providing to the chemistry, a formal structure of extracting the chemical knowledge. Thus,
we explored all possible presence of relationships among elements. Concepts like degree
centrality and centralization, the relationships among metals, semimetal and nonmetal
classes, blocks, and chemical families were analyzed. We observed that the network struc-
ture had a small core set of elements of high reactivity and also a peripheral set of elements
of low reactivity. The classes, blocks and families show the following increasing order of
reactivity: nonmetals > semimetals > metals; p > s > d > f; and families: boron, carbon, pnic-
togens, chalcogens, halogens, lanthanoids > other families. This example shows, from the
network perspective, that the elements and their classifications exhibit properties such as
the reactivity, order, and similarity.

Keywords  Periodic table · Chemical elements · Stoichiometric binary compounds ·

Network theory

* Rosana del P. Suárez

rosanadsuarez@gmail.com
1
Laboratorio de Química Teórica, Universidad de Pamplona, Km1 Vía Bucaramanga, Pamplona,
Colombia

13
 R. P. Suárez

Introduction

Chemical substances are related through chemical reactions, generating what Joachim
Schummer has called “The Chemical Core of Chemistry”: a network that builds the basis
of chemical knowledge (Schummer 1998). Therefore, the similarities in the positions of
the chemical substances in this network have allowed chemists to build classifications of
chemical substances (e.g. aldehydes, ketones, esters, etc.) and to deliver routes to synthe-
size them (Schummer 1998). The knowledge generated from this perspective has unveiled
patterns that have prevailed for over a century, despite a plethora of newly synthesized
substances. In more recent years, network modeling has been formalized, mathematized,
and started to be successfully applied in chemistry. For instance, the Network of Organic
Chemistry (NOC) (Fialkowski et al. 2005) project has built a network of around 5 million
substances and 9 million reactions and found that they presents similar behavior to other
complex systems such as internet, metabolic networks, and social networks, and used them
to develop algorithms to find synthetic routes that satisfy the needs of companies in the
productive sector (Bishop et  al. 2006; Grzybowski et  al. 2009; Gothard et  al. 2012 and
Kowalik et al. 2012). Other results from the network approach are the pharmacological and
cellular studies (gene interactions, proteins, metabolites, etc.) that have contributed to the
understanding of biological processes (Han et al. 2004) and a consequent impact on drug
development (Hopkins 2008). All these developments prove the predictive power of rela-
tional models in chemistry.
Despite these successes and how fundamental the network perspective is to chemistry,
there are still are very few studies linking modern network analysis with the basic concepts
of chemistry, possibly because such concepts are considered an already settled matter. This
is the case of the periodic table, which has its origins in the 17th century and was improved
in the 19th century when scientists began to observe similarities and patterns among the
elements. Therefore, Mendeleev, who established the basis of his study through an over-
view of the elements as chemical substances, is credited with the most important event
in the history of the periodic table (Dushman 1916). He showed the presence of different
types of relations such as periodic trends and similarities among chemical families (Scerri
2007). However, this knowledge was fundamentally built up with information of 19th cen-
tury, so the question nowadays is whether this structure, that is, the periodic relations of the
elements, is maintained when we study them with the information we currently have.
This has motivated new studies that have retaken this seminal achievement through a
systemic view of the chemical elements related by their properties. These studies have
been carried out combining network modeling, clustering techniques, and a topological
approach, which has allowed a new understanding of the periodic table. Restrepo et  al.
(2004), for example, showed a relationship between topological invariants and periodic
groups. Using neural networks, Chen (2010) depicted a two-dimensional map showing
interactions among the elements; this led to the confirmation of the existence of the singu-
larity principle and diagonal relations. Last, Leal et al. (2012) showed that such relations
can arise from a more explicit and exclusively relational approach.
These researchers have found similar relationships among elements through their prop-
erties; however, there are still unanswered questions that are not limited only to the posi-
tions of the chemical elements in the periodic table (Chen 2010). In this way, the present
research seeks, through the networks of reactions and tools of modern mathematics, to
strengthen the basic concepts of chemistry. By applying the network theory to the forma-
tion of binary compounds between chemical elements, we find widely accepted facts about

13
The network theory: a new language for speaking about chemical…

the periodic table, which confirms that imported models and methods of network analysis
are suitable for the study of chemical phenomena in the most fundamental level. In addi-
tion, possible solutions that allow resolving disputes that cover the concepts of the periodic
table are shown. Finally, we can make new statements about well-known patterns of the
chemical elements. All this shows the theoretical richness of the new approach.

Methodology

Methodological foundations: network analysis

In sociology, anthropology, mathematics and computer science, it has been possible to

understand the behavior of different systems by applying network theory. From a math-
ematical point of view, a network can be defined as a graph, i.e. a set of actors (vertexes),
linked to one another through a set of relationships (edges) (Barabási and Bonabeau 2003).
In this work, network theory facilitated the study of 94 elements of the periodic table
by analyzing their ability to form binary compounds through a network. So, new relations
that emerge from their interactions were analyzed. The centrality, centralization degree,
and the classifications: metals, nonmetals and semimetals, blocks, and families of the peri-
odic table were studied. We used these elements for representing the vertexes; the union of
each pair of elements that forms at least one stoichiometric binary compound was used for
representing the edges. These edges were constructed using the database Leal et al. (2012)
which covers a total of 4700 stoichiometric binary compounds; the set X has 94 chemical
elements which belong to these binary compounds as follows:

X = {H, Li, Be, B, C, N, O, F, Na, Mg, Al, Si, P, S, Cl, K, Ca, Sc, Ti, V, Cr, Mn, Fe, Co,
Ni, Cu, Zn, Ga, Rb, Sr, Y, Zr, Nb, Mo, Tc, Ru, Rh, Pd, Pt, Cd, In, Sn, Sb, Te, I, Xe,
Cs, Ba, La, Ce, Pr, Nd, Pm, Sm, Eu, Gd, Tb, Dy, Ho, Er, Tm, Yb, Lu, Hf, Ta, W, Re,
Os, Ir, Pt, Au, Hg, Tl, Pb, Bi, Po, At, Ra, Ac, Th, Pa, U, Np, Pu, Am, Cm, Bk, Cf, Es}

A trial example for explaining how the construction of the network of chemical elements
from the formation of stoichiometric binary compounds is shown.1 Given a set of com-
pounds {B2H6, B5H9, B10H14, HF, LiF, LiH} and its elements {B, H, F, Li}, i.e. vertexes,
the edges of the network were built up connecting with a line each pair of elements form-
ing at least one binary compound. Thus, the union of all the elements and their connections
build up the network of Fig. 1; here the degree of every element is the number of lines that
it has. B has degree 1, F and Li has degree 2, H has degree 3; these numbers express that
H is the element that forms a larger number of binary compounds (generating compounds
that are chemically diverse) and in contrast, B has less diversity in its relationships.

1
 The database of Leal et  al. (2012) used in this research consists of 4700 stoichiometric binary com-
pounds, based in the understanding that a binary compound is formed by two different chemical elements,
has a chemical bond and there is a change in the chemical nature of the elements. However, this database
does not include intermetallic compounds; for this reason, it is interesting to assess the presence of non-sto-
ichiometric and intermetallic binary compounds using network theory. Herein, stoichiometric compounds
are just a sample but taking both non-stoichiometric and stoichiometric compounds, a clear landscape could
be expected. Results of this approach will be published in a coming paper.

13
 R. P. Suárez

Fig. 1  Example of network for-

mation of stoichiometric binary
compounds, where the letters,
represent the vertexes of network
elements and the lines, the edges
or existence of at least one binary
compound between pairs of ele-
ments. The graphic program used
was Pajek64 4.05

Centrality and centralization degree of the network of chemical elements

Within the chemical network there are vertexes that are considered the center of the net-
work, i.e. those chemical elements that interact with a lot of elements within the network,
easily forming a large number and diversity of binary compounds; this is reflected by the
degree of each chemical element, where those are considered the most central, they will
have greater degree. In this work the chemical elements were assessed according to their
centrality to find the most central elements that form the most diverse binary compounds,
in other words, it shows the more reactive chemical elements.
The centralization degree of a network is the variation in the degrees of vertexes divided
by the maximum variation degree, which is possible in a network of the same size (Nooy
et al. 2006). In this work 3 aspects were evaluated: 1) if the network has a few key elements
to form as many binary compounds (centralized network); 2) if it shows a large set of basic
elements for this training (decentralized network); or 3) if there are not core elements and
all are on average the same number of binary compounds (distributed network). This cen-
tralization was calculated from Eq. 1 (Nooy et al. 2006).
∑�V�
(gmax − g(i))
DC = i=1
(1)
(�V� − 1)(�V� − 2)

where DC is the degree centralization, gmax is the maximum degree that a vertex has in
the network, g(i) is the degree of the selected vertex and |V| is the number of vertexes of
the network.
The maximum value of the degree of centralization is one (DC = 1), which shows that
there is a single central vertex connected to all vertexes of the network and the minimum
value is zero (DC = 0), which shows the behavior of an equally connected network where
there are no central vertexes.

Relations within the network of chemical elements using the classifications:

metals, nonmetals and semimetals, blocks and families of the periodic table

The network was partitioned from three common classifications in literature: metal,
semimetal and nonmetal classes, blocks s, p, d and f, and the families of the periodic
table. Then, each class was analyzed in the network by placing the most central ele-
ments in the center and less central elements to the periphery. It was observed whether
there was any pattern among classes for the ability of an element to form binary com-
pounds. Likewise, each class was reduced to a single vertex containing the connections

13
The network theory: a new language for speaking about chemical…

Fig. 2  Network of chemical elements from the stoichiometric binary compounds. Red circles show the
chemical elements labeled by symbols and the lines among each pair of elements show the existence of at
least one binary compound. The graphic program used was Pajek64 4.05. (Color figure online)

with at least one element forming a binary compound in order to study the class to class
interactions and in doing so, we found the most connected chemical families and the
preferences of each family to form binary compounds with the other families. In addi-
tion, the percentage of connections that each pair of families presented was calculated.
This percentage was related the number of connections between all the elements of each
family and the maximum possible number of connections between the elements of each
family. In this way, the percentages above 50% represent the families with greater rela-
tionships within the network were left on the edges.

Results and discussion

Network topological structure of the chemical elements: centrality

and centralization degree

Figure  2 shows the network of chemical elements from the formation of stoichiomet-
ric binary compounds. This network has a degree centralization of 0.772; this num-
ber expresses that the network is highly centralized, according to the classifications of
Sueur et al. (2012). So, there are a few key elements that are the base for the formation
of binary compounds. Besides, it allows the connecting of the other chemical elements.
It was found that the group of elements which dominate the reactions within the net-
work through the centrality degree, thus H, S, I, Cl, Br, O, F are the most reactive in the
network and are called the core elements of the network, since they form stoichiometric
binary compounds with at least 70 elements out of the 94 used in the research; this fact
is probably explained by their high electronegativity. This reactivity decreases as we
arrive in the outer part of the network, where elements Kr, Xe, Ac, At, Ra, are called
the peripheral elements of the network, already they react with two or less different
elements. This is possibly due to the high electronic stability of Ar and Kr, and nuclear

13
 R. P. Suárez

Fig. 3  Network of chemical elements from the stoichiometric binary compounds, partitioned into three
groups: metals in yellow, semimetals in green and nonmetals in blue. The graphic program used was
Pajek64 4.05. (Color figure online)

instability of At, Ac and Ra characterized by having a spontaneous disintegration of the

nucleus, as was stated by Firsching (1981).

Relations among metals, nonmetals and semimetals within the network

The network of chemical elements was partitioned into three classes, metals, semimet-
als and nonmetals in order to study their relationships. However, in theory, there is no
unequivocal agreement defining the elements that belong to the semimetal class. Conse-
quently, Vernon (2013) through a large number of reviews in the literature, found that the
most common semimetals elements considered by researchers are: B, Si, Ge, As, Sb, Te;
these elements follow the criteria of Masterton and Slowinski (1977) on the characteristics
expected of a semimetal. However, Vernon (2013) considered that At could be a semimetal
because it has a band structure similar to the elements of this group; and based on studies
of a large number of researchers, this author classifies elements like Po and Se as metal and
nonmetal, respectively.
The research performed by Vernon (2013), was used to partition the network of chem-
ical elements in classes metal (yellow), semimetal (green) and nonmetal (blue) (Fig.  3).
Herein, the nonmetals are gathered in the center of the network and characterized by
forming binary compounds with a large number of different elements; this fact implies
that these are considered the most reactive. They are followed by semimetal elements and
finally by metallic elements located towards the periphery and forming a few binary com-
pounds. Significantly, in the semimetal class At and Ge do not form binary compounds
with metals; the reason of that could be the chemical similarity of Ge with these elements
and the nuclear instability of At (Firsching 1981).
Given the connectivity of the classes: metal, semimetal and nonmetal, it is important
to ask what would happen if the nonmetallic and semimetallic elements of the network
are eliminated? It is observed that the network is disconnected almost completely (Fig. 4).
Thus, the semimetallic and nonmetallic elements are key in the formation of stoichiomet-
ric binary compounds, and the metal elements depend on these two groups to form such

13
The network theory: a new language for speaking about chemical…

Fig. 4  Disconnecting the network of chemical elements from the stoichiometric binary compounds,
through eliminating the semimetallic elements (green circles) and nonmetallic (blue circles) the metallic
elements (yellow circles) are disconnected almost completely. The graphic program used was Pajek64 4.05.
(Color figure online)

compounds. It is important to highlight that nonmetal and semimetal classes contain only
20 out of the 94 network elements. It is also interesting to note that Bi and Po (elements
highly discussed by not having a single position in these classes) are connected to a large
number of metallic elements similar to semimetals. Given these results, the criteria of
Vernon (2013) might be reconsidered due to consistent results with the work of Rochow
(1966) and Carmalt and Norman (1998) for Bi. However, this research contradicts the
works of Maxwell (1949), Hawkes (2001) and Vernon (2013) because Po resembles more
to the class of semimetals.
Furthermore, it is observed that semimetals and nonmetals have interclass and intraclass
interactions, possibly because these groups are more electronegative elements, which allow
for forming such connections. Interclass refers to relations between classes, such as the
relations between elements of the metal and nonmetal classes; while intraclass refers to
the relationships of the elements of each class, such as relations between Po and Ba of the
semimetal class.
According to the chemical similarity intraclass, one could say that Ge shows little simi-
larity to the semimetallic elements because it just has connections with nonmetals and very
few with metals, and At presents very few interactions that are more akin to the peripheral
elements of the metal class than to the semimetals.
Additionally, the elements analyzed are similar to the class semimetal from their chemi-
cal properties and their interactions in this study are: B, Si, As, Sb, Te. Noble gases exhibit
reactivity opposite to members of the nonmetal class because of their electronic stability
which gives them their full octet. This clearly shows that there are reactivity characteristics
that define members of metal, semimetal and nonmetal classes, but not all elements can be
characterized due to the robustness of classification.

Relations among the blocks of the periodic table

Currently, there are four main blocks for chemical elements according to the order of the
periodic table; in this way, the blocks are named according to the furthest orbital that
makes the atom of the element of the study. Specifically, the blocks s, p, d, f (Connelly
et al. 2005).
Figure  5 shows the partition of the blocks on the network of chemical elements. We
observed that the controlling block of the interactions among the elements is the p-block,
since most of its elements form a large number of binary compounds, except for the noble

13
 R. P. Suárez

Fig. 5  Network of chemical elements from the stoichiometric binary compounds, partitioned into four
blocks: s-block (orange), p-block (light blue), d-block (green) and f-block (fuchsia). The graphic program
used was Pajek64 4.05. (Color figure online)

Fig. 6  Network of chemical
elements from the stoichiometric
binary compounds reduced in
four blocks: s-block (orange),
p-block (light blue), d-block
(green) and f-block (fuchsia). The
numbers represent the percent-
ages (%) of connectivity between
the elements of each pair of
blocks. The graphic program
used was Pajek64 4.05. (Color
figure online)

gases and At. These elements have an atypical behavior possibly due to their electronic sta-
bility and nuclear instability. The following is the s-block, in which we point out the high
reactivity of H because it tends to behave more like the p-block elements and the low reac-
tivity of Ra, possibly because of its nuclear instability. Furthermore, d-block has heteroge-
neous connections, because there are elements with high reactivity and low reactivity with
the network. Finally, the f-block is considered the less reactive in these classes since most
of its elements show very little interaction compared to other blocks; it should be noted that
half of the elements of this class are radioactive and little abundant in nature, and therefore,
present little information in the literature affect the results.
The elements of each block were reduced to a single vertex, where each vertex contains
all relationships of the elements of this block. In addition, the percentage of elements that
interact between each pair of blocks is shown on the edge. Figure 6 showed that:

• s-block elements form at least one stoichiometric binary compound with the elements
that have in their most exterior layer the p, d or f orbitals. However, the relations

13
The network theory: a new language for speaking about chemical…

Fig. 7  Long Form Periodic Table of chemical elements according to IUPAC. Two options for Group 3 are
presented: a option 1, which includes the elements Sc, Y, Lu, Lr and b option 2, which includes the ele-
ments Sc, Y, La, Ac. The graphic program used was PowerPoint 2013

between s y p are highlighted, since more than half of their elements form binary com-
pounds, compared to the relations s, d and s, f. This is possible due to their differences
in electronegativity which make them more compatible to join.
• p-block elements form at least one stoichiometric binary compound with the elements
that have in their most exterior layer the s, d or f orbital. Thus, it is observed that the
elements of the p and s block have more than 50% affinity to interact with each other, as
well as the elements of block p and d that present around 48% of the interactions. This
shows the strongly electronegative character of half of the elements in this block to
form stoichiometric binary compounds.
• d-block and f-block elements form at least one stoichiometric binary compound with the
elements that have in their most exterior layer the s or p orbitals in similar proportions,
being more compatible with the elements of block p than with block s. Both groups
share the same type of relationships, however, it should be noted that there is not at
least one element that forms binary stoichiometric compounds, possibly this is due to
there have been very few chemical studies of substances already that are radioactive
and scarce.

Relations among the families of the periodic table

The elements of the periodic table are arranged in order of increasing atomic number. The
rows are called periods and the columns are called groups or families. Thus, elements with
similar chemical properties are in the same group of elements. According to the Interna-
tional Union of Pure and Applied Chemistry (IUPAC), there are 18 families and two chem-
ical groups known as lanthanoids and actinoids (Connelly et al. 2005; IUPAC 2016). How-
ever, the scandium family (family 3) shows two possible classifications made by IUPAC,
involving lanthanoids and actinoids. Option 1 covers Sc, Y, Lu, Lr elements (Fig. 7a) and

13
 R. P. Suárez

Fig. 8  Network of chemical elements from the stoichiometric binary compounds, according to the IUPAC
chemical families: a option 1, b option 2. The Graphic program used was Pajek64 4.05

option 2 the Sc, Y, La, Ac elements (Fig. 7b). Consequently, two partitions on the network
with option 1 (Fig. 8a) and option 2 (Fig. 8b) according to the IUPAC were made (IUPAC
2016).
So, through the connections of Fig.  8 and the distribution of the elements of the
chemical families distinguished by colors (of greater connections in the center and
minors in the periphery), it was found that the elements of each family have similari-
ties in their connections, since they have a number of similar connections and they are
close between one another in the network of Fig. 8. Also, some important exceptions are
those such as Ra of the family of alkaline earth metals (family 2) and At family of halo-
gens (family 17), due to their nuclear instability. Furthermore, for both classifications, a
much larger similarity was observed between Sc and Y with Lu that Sc and Y with La,
since Lu presents numbers and types of connections similar to this pair of elements. In

13
The network theory: a new language for speaking about chemical…

Fig. 9  Network of chemical elements from the stoichiometric binary compounds, reduced according to the
IUPAC chemical families: option 1. The numbers represent the percentages (%) of connectivity between the
elements of each pair of families. The graphic program used was Pajek64 4.05

this way, option 1 established by IUPAC was selected to understand the relationships
between chemical families, shown below, given their greater similarity. Thus, the ele-
ments of each chemical family were reduced to a single vertex so that the reduced vertex
had a connection to another family, as shown in Fig. 9. The condition is that each family
has at least one of its elements connected to a different family. In addition, on the edge
was placed the percentage of reactivity that each chemical family presents, in this way
a 50% support between families 1 and 14, for example, represents that about half of the
elements between family 1 and 14 form a binary composite.
From this reduction and its support it can be observed that families located at the
center of the network are the most reactive, such as the families of the boron group
(13), carbon group (14), pnictogens (15), chalcogen (16), halogens (17) and lanthanoids
(19), since they interact with the greatest number of chemical families and between each
pair of families they form compounds superior to 70% of the relationships. Also, it was
observed that those families are located on the periphery of the network as alkali metals
(1), alkaline earth metals (2), transition metals (3–12) and actinoids (20) depend heavily
on the central families because without them they could not form stoichiometric binary
compounds.
The network of chemical elements grouped and reduced from the families of the peri-
odic table allowed to study not only the number of connections that each family has, but
also what families are interacting with one another. The following is the characterization
shown:

• The families of the alkali metals (1) and actinoids are characterized by forming at least
one stoichiometric binary compound with the families of the alkaline earth metals (13),
carbon (14), pnictogens (15), chalcogens (16), halogens (17) and lanthanoids (19).
However, stronger interactions greater than 50% of connections are shown between car-
bon (14), pnictogens (15), chalcogens (16) and halogens (17).

13
 R. P. Suárez

• The families of alkaline earth metals (2), scandium (3), titanium (4), vanadium (5),
chrome (6) and nickel (10) are characterized by forming at least one stoichiometric
binary compound with alkali metals (1), boron (13), carbon (14), pnictogens (15), chal-
cogens (16) and halogens (17). However, stronger interactions greater than 65% of con-
nections are shown between chalcogens (16) and halogens (17) with earth metals (2),
scandium (3), vanadium (5) and chrome (6); and pnictogens (15) and halogens (17)
with interactions greater than 70% with titanium (4) and nickel (10).
• The families of manganese (7), iron (8) and cobalt (9) are characterized by forming at
least one stoichiometric binary compounds with the families of the boron (13), carbon
(14), pnictogens (15), chalcogens (16) and halogens (17). These last three families pre-
sent interactions greater than 60% among these families.
• The family of copper (11) is characterized by forming at least one stoichiometric binary
compound with the families of the alkali metals (1), carbon (14), pnictogens (15), chal-
cogens (16) and halogens (17). However, families 14, 16 and 17 show the strongest
interactions, greater than 50% of the connections with this family.
• The family of zinc (12) is characterized by forming at least one stoichiometric binary
compound with the families of the alkali metals (1), pnictogens (15), chalcogens (16)
and halogens (17). However, families 16 and 17 show the strongest interactions, greater
than 80% of the connections with this family.
• The family of boron (13) is characterized by forming at least one stoichiometric binary
compound with all families except for the families of copper (11) zinc (12) and the
noble gases (18). However, families 15, 16 and 17 show the strongest interactions,
greater than 70% of the connections with this family.
• The family of carbon (14) is characterized by forming at least one stoichiometric binary
compound with all families except for families of zinc (12) and noble gases (18). How-
ever, families 16 and 17 show the strongest interactions, greater than 80% of the con-
nections with this family.
• The families of pnictogens (15) and chalcogens (16) are characterized by forming at
least one stoichiometric binary compound with all families except for the family of the
noble gases (18). However, families 16 and 17 show the strongest interactions, greater
than 50% of the connections with 15, 17 and 19 show the strongest interactions, greater
than 70% with 16.
• The family of halogens (17) is characterized by forming at least one stoichiometric
binary compound with all families. However, families 14, 16 and 17 show the strongest
interactions, greater than 50% of the connections with this family.
• The family of noble gases (18) is characterized by forming at least one stoichiometric
binary compound with the family of halogens (17) with interactions greater than 20%.
• The family of lanthanoids (19) is characterized by forming at least one stoichiometric
binary compound with all families except for the families of manganese (7), iron (8),
cobalt (9) and noble gases (18). However, the strongest interactions, greater than 70%
are with 16 and 17.

This paper offers the application of contemporary mathematics of network theory to the
study of the periodic table, using methods that have not been applied before in the basic
concepts of chemistry and that are based on the chemical properties seen from the point of
view of the reactions, that is, the interactions between substances. In addition, these results
show that the view of the network and the use of network theory as a mathematical tool
positively impact the study of the periodic table, introducing concepts that show reactiv-
ity, similarity and order in the elements and in the chemical classes. It gives a new texture

13
The network theory: a new language for speaking about chemical…

to the cornerstone of chemical theory, to the periodic table and a new vision to the basic
concepts of this science.

Summary

This research agrees with widely accepted facts about the periodic table, which confirms
that models and methods imported from network analysis are adequate for the study of
chemical phenomena at the most fundamental level. Some other results contribute to the
settlement of controversies between competing hypotheses in that field, which proves that
the new approach can be of value, and some other results confirm new statements about
well-known patterns of the chemical elements, which shows that the new approach is theo-
retically rich with the capacity to produce statements about nature. For this reason, network
theory can be proposed for exploring the knowledge in the relations among chemical ele-
ments. This research gives the teaching of chemistry a way to develop knowledge with
the help of network theory as a tool for extracting concepts and patterns known and even
unknown to chemistry.
From an integral perspective, the relationships emerging from the interactions among
chemical elements by using their ability to form chemical properties as the formation of
stoichiometric binary compounds is shown. In this way, this research validates the philo-
sophical ideas proposed by Schummer (1998) about “The Chemical Core of Chemistry”.
The emerging properties found from interactions of the chemical elements and the well-
known three classifications in the periodic table showed that:

1. The network consists of two types of elements with opposite characteristics, the core
consisting of: H, S, I, Cl, Br, O, F is characterized by its high reactivity while the periph-
ery: Ac, Kr, Xe, At, Ra is characterized by its low reactivity.
2. Considering the three classes: metal, nonmetal and semimetal, there is an order of
chemical reactivity with the elements of each class by forming stoichiometric binary
compounds according to the database of Leal et al. (2012). These relationships show
that nonmetals are the most reactive, followed by semimetals and finally metals. This
sequence of reactivity is based on the physical characteristics that typically define these
classes of substances where the metals and nonmetals show opposite characteristics and
the semimetals exhibit properties of both classes. In addition, it should be considered
that the noble gases, At and Ra, do not resemble, chemically, the elements of these three
classes since At and Ra’s reactivity is really low.
3. The blocks s, p, d, f, viewed through the network of chemical elements, show that the
elements in the last level, which are located in the p orbital, are the most reactive fol-
lowed by the orbitals: s, d and f. Also, the Block model analysis of compounds classified
in the s, p, d, and f blocks, yielded an almost complete graph: only the link between the
d and f type compounds is missing. This is possible by the chemical character similarity
between block d and f.
4. According to the classification of the IUPAC, the families of the boron (13), carbon
(14), pnictogens (15), chalcogens (16), halogens (17) and lanthanoids (19) are the most
reactive in the network, and the remaining families, mostly formed by transition metals
(3–12), alkali metals (1), alkaline earth metals (2) and actinoids (20) are families with
low reactivity that rely on the network of central families to form stoichiometric binary
compounds.

13
 R. P. Suárez

Acknowledgements  R. Suarez thanks Leal et al. for allowing using their database stoichiometric binary
compounds, and Nancy Y. Quintero, Joachim Schummer, Eugenio Llanos, Tatiana Suárez and Guillermo
Restrepo, for their contributions, valuable discussions and useful reviews given to this research.

References
Barabási, A., Bonabeau, E.: Scale-free networks. Sci. Am. 288, 50–59 (2003)
Bishop, K.J.M., Grzybowski, R., Bartosz, A.: The core and most useful molecules in organic chemistry.
Angew. Chem. Int. Ed. Engl. 46, 5348–5354 (2006)
Carmalt, C.J., Norman, N.C.: Arsenic, Antimony and Bismuth: Some General Properties and Aspects of
Periodicity. Springer, London (1998)
Chen, D.Z.: A new method for studying the periodic system based on a Kohonen neural network. J. Chem.
Educ. 87, 433–434 (2010)
Connelly, N.G., Damhus, T., Hartshorn, R.M., Hutton, A.T.: Elements. In: Connelly, N.G., Damhus, T.
(eds.) Nomenclature of Inorganic Chemistry: IUPAC Recommendations 2005, pp. 51–52. Royal Soci-
ety of Chemistry, Cambridge (2005)
Dushman, S.: The periodic law: a review of late developments and a revised from of Mendelejeff’s table.
Sci. Am. 81, 44–46 (1916)
Fialkowski, M., Bishop, K.J.M., Chubukov, V.A., Campbell, C.J., Grzybowski, B.A.: Architecture and evo-
lution of organic chemistry. Comput. Chem. 44, 7263–7269 (2005)
Firsching, F.H.: Anomalies in the periodic table. J. Chem. Ed. 58, 478–479 (1981)
Gothard, C.M., Soh, S., Gothard, N.A., Kowalczyk, B., Wei, Y., Baytekin, B., Grzybowski, B.A.: Rewiring
chemistry: algorithmic discovery and experimental validation of one-pot reactions in the network of
organic chemistry. Angew. Chem. Int. Ed. Engl. 51, 7922–7927 (2012)
Grzybowski, B.A., Bishop, K.J.M., Kowalczyk, B., Wilmer, C.E.: The ‘wired’ universe of organic chemis-
try. Nat. Chem. 1, 31–36 (2009)
Han, J.-D.J., Bertin, N., Hao, T., Goldberg, D.S., Berriz, G.F., Zhang, L.V., Dupuy, D., Walhout, A.J.M.,
Cusick, M.E., Roth, F.P., Vidal, M.: Evidence for dynamically organized modularity in the yeast pro-
tein–protein interaction network. Nature 430, 88–93 (2004)
Hawkes, S.: Semimetallicity? J. Chem. Ed. 78, 1686–1687 (2001)
Hopkins, A.: Network pharmacology: the next paradigm in drug discovery. Nat. Chem. Biol. 4, 682–690
(2008)
International Union of Pure and Applied Chemistry (IUPAC): Periodic table of elements. http://iupac​.org/
what-we-do/perio​dic-table​-of-eleme​nts/. Accessed 20 May 2016
Kowalik, M., Gothard, C.M., Drews, A.M., Gothard, N.A., Weckiewicz, A., Patrick, E.F., Grzybowski,
B.A., Bishop, K.J.M.: Parallel optimization of synthetic pathways within the network of organic chem-
istry. Angew. Chem. Int. Ed. Engl. 51, 7928–7932 (2012)
Leal, W., Restrepo, G., Bernal, A.: A network study of chemical elements: from binary compounds to chem-
ical trends. Match 68, 417–422 (2012)
Masterton, W.L., Slowinski, E.J.: Chemical Principles. W. B. Saunders, Philadelphia (1977)
Maxwell, C.: Physical properties of polonium. I. Melting point, electrical resistance, density, and allotropy.
J. Chem. Phys. 17, 1288–1292 (1949)
Nooy, W., Mrvar, A., Batagelj, V.: Exploratory social network analysis with pajek. Cambridge University
Press, New York (2006)
Restrepo, G., Mesa, H., Llanos, E.J., Villaveces, J.L.: Topological study of the periodic system. J. Chem.
Inf. Model. 44, 68–75 (2004)
Rochow, E.G.: The Metalloids. D. C. Heath and Company, Boston (1966)
Scerri, E.: The Periodic Table: Its Story and Its Significance. Oxford University Press, New York (2007)
Schummer, J.: The chemical core of chemistry I: a conceptual approach. Hyle 4, 129–162 (1998)
Sueur, C., Deneubourg, J.L., Petit, O.: From social network (centralized vs. decentralized) to collective deci-
sion-making (unshared vs. shared consensus). PLoS ONE 7, e32566 (2012)
Vernon, R.E.: Which elements are metalloids? J. Chem. Ed. 90, 1703–1707 (2013)

13