Group 13 complexes of dipyridylmethane, a forgotten ligand in coordination chemistry
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The reactions of dipyridylmethane (dpma) with group 13 trichlorides were investigated in 1 : 1 and 1 : 2 molar ratios using NMR spectroscopy and X-ray crystallography. With 1 : 1 stoichiometry and Et2O as solvent, reactions employing AlCl3 or GaCl3 gave mixtures of products with the salt [(dpma)2MCl2](+)[MCl4](-) (M = Al, Ga) as the main species. The corresponding reactions in 1 : 2 molar ratio gave similar mixtures but with [(dpma)MCl2](+)[MCl4](-) as the primary product. Pure salts [(dpma)AlCl2](+)[Cl](-) and [(dpma)AlCl2](+)[AlCl4](-) could be obtained by performing the reactions in CH3CN. In the case of InCl3, a neutral monoadduct (dpma)InCl3 formed regardless of the stoichiometry employed. A neutral adduct (dpma)(BCl3)2 was obtained from the reaction between dpma and BCl3 in Et2O using 1 : 2 stoichiometry. With 1 : 1 molar ratio of reagents, a mixture of products and deprotonation of the methylene bridge in [(dpma)BCl2](+) was observed. The experimental data showed that the structural flexibility of the dpma ligand results in more diverse coordination chemistry with group 13 elements than that observed for bipyridine (bpy), while computational investigations indicated that the investigated metal-ligand interactions are, to a first approximation, independent of the ligand type. Electrochemical and chemical attempts to reduce the cations [(dpma)MCl2](+) showed that, in stark contrast to the chemistry of the related [(bpy)BCl2](+) cation, the neutral radicals [(dpma)MCl2]˙ are extremely unstable. Differences in the redox behaviour of dpma and bpy could be rationalized with the electronic structure of the ligand and that of the methylene bridge in particular. As a whole, the facile reactivity of the methylene bridge in the dpma ligand renders it amenable to further reactivity and functionalization that is not possible in the case of bpy.
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) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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 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".