Comparative Study of Prism Octahedron Network via Eccentric Invariants

<div>Comparison of <svg height="11.9479pt" id="M141" style="vertical-align:-3.181499pt" version="1.1" viewbox="-0.0498162 -8.7664 23.3926 11.9479" width="23.3926pt" xmlns="http://www.w3.org/2000/svg" xmlns:xlink="http://www.w3.org/1999/xlink"><g transform="matrix(.013,0,0,-0.013,0,0)"><path d="M692 302H438V274C537 267 543 260 543 188V103C543 61 531 48 511 37C489 26 458 20 424 20C231 20 146 188 146 333C146 517 258 630 411 630C507 630 582 597 606 474L634 480C627 546 622 601 619 636C586 643 510 665 426 665C230 665 44 552 44 321C44 122 191 -15 411 -15C491 -15 573 7 635 21C629 49 628 81 628 116V202C628 261 632 266 692 274V302Z"></path></g><g transform="matrix(.013,0,0,-0.013,9.295,0)"><path d="M673 0V28C608 34 594 43 563 129C499 303 432 494 370 665L339 656L132 132C98 43 84 37 20 28V0H238V28C162 35 154 45 175 108C188 150 203 192 219 237H432C454 176 474 122 487 83S491 36 428 28V0H673ZM418 280H234C265 362 296 450 328 535H330L418 280Z"></path></g><g transform="matrix(.0091,0,0,-0.0091,18.347,3.132)"><path d="M462 177V227H365V632H320C217 496 116 350 21 208V177H284V109C284 43 280 38 190 31V0H451V31C369 38 365 43 365 108V177H462ZM284 227H88C155 336 218 430 282 519H284V227Z"></path></g></svg> and <svg height="12.0575pt" id="M142" style="vertical-align:-3.2911pt" version="1.1" viewbox="-0.0498162 -8.7664 30.6738 12.0575" width="30.6738pt" xmlns="http://www.w3.org/2000/svg" xmlns:xlink="http://www.w3.org/1999/xlink"><g transform="matrix(.013,0,0,-0.013,0,0)"><path d="M673 0V28C608 34 594 43 563 129C499 303 432 494 370 665L339 656L132 132C98 43 84 37 20 28V0H238V28C162 35 154 45 175 108C188 150 203 192 219 237H432C454 176 474 122 487 83S491 36 428 28V0H673ZM418 280H234C265 362 296 450 328 535H330L418 280Z"></path></g><g transform="matrix(.013,0,0,-0.013,8.983,0)"><path d="M372 352C427 368 507 407 507 502C507 548 486 592 451 616C420 638 376 650 301 650H44V622C124 616 128 610 128 527V123C128 40 122 34 36 28V0H257C336 0 402 12 453 40C512 72 548 124 548 191C548 291 471 335 372 350V352ZM213 362V558C213 591 216 602 226 608C235 614 258 618 282 618C377 618 415 558 415 490C415 406 369 362 260 362H213ZM213 328H258C380 328 450 283 450 181C450 76 377 35 296 34C231 34 213 53 213 125V328Z"></path></g><g transform="matrix(.013,0,0,-0.013,16.888,0)"><path d="M614 175C564 76 510 21 408 21C256 21 146 149 146 336C146 488 235 629 402 629C510 629 570 586 597 480L626 488C620 541 614 582 606 638C578 643 510 665 429 665C206 665 44 527 44 316C44 157 153 -15 402 -15C474 -15 558 5 586 11C604 45 629 119 643 165L614 175Z"></path></g><g transform="matrix(.0091,0,0,-0.0091,25.628,3.132)"><path d="M158 548H390L417 615L410 623H122L83 318C105 326 143 337 185 337C296 337 350 275 350 188C350 116 308 42 225 42C164 42 122 74 100 93C90 101 82 99 72 92C60 82 51 68 50 59C48 46 52 38 66 24C82 9 125 -12 172 -12C225 -11 292 15 346 59C408 108 437 166 437 226C437 309 371 397 242 397C214 397 170 382 133 369L158 548Z"></path></g></svg> for prism octahedron network.</div>

Journal of Chemistry

fig2

Figure 2

Figure 2: Comparative Study of Prism Octahedron Network via Eccentric Invariants 