Low‐Oxidation‐State Main Group CompoundsUpdate based on the original article by Charles L. B. Macdonald and Bobby D. Ellis,<i>Encyclopedia of Inorganic Chemistry</i>Second Edition, © 2005, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract The synthesis and chemistry of compounds containing groups 1, 2, and 13‐15 elements in unusually low oxidation states or valence states is presented. In general, the oxidation or valence state of an element influences the chemistry of the compounds in which the atom is found. For the main group elements, compounds containing elements in lower‐than‐usual oxidation or valence states exhibit significantly different structural features, modes of bonding, and chemistry than is observed for compounds containing the element in a more typical oxidation state. The elements of the s‐block form a limited number of low‐oxidation‐state compounds and the elements of groups 16‐18 are generally found in the lowest available oxidation state. Thus, this article provides an overview of the following classes of low‐valent main group species: the chemistry of group 2 elements in the +1 oxidation state, the chemistry of group 13 elements in oxidation states lower than +3, the chemistry of group 14 elements in oxidation states lower than +2, and the chemistry of the group 15 elements in oxidation states lower than +3. Numerous exemplary modes of reactivity are presented, and the utility of some low‐oxidation‐state compounds as catalysts or precursors to materials is acknowledged.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.030 | 0.011 |
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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".