Ligand Influences on Copper Molybdate Networks: The Structures and Magnetism of [Cu(3,4‘-bpy)MoO<sub>4</sub>], [Cu(3,3‘-bpy)<sub>0.5</sub>MoO<sub>4</sub>], and [Cu(4,4‘-bpy)<sub>0.5</sub>MoO<sub>4</sub>]·1.5H<sub>2</sub>O
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The reactions of a Cu(II) salt, MoO(3), and the appropriate bipyridine ligand yield a series of bimetallic oxides, [Cu(3,4'-bpy)MoO(4)] (1), [Cu(3,3'-bpy)(0.5)MoO(4)] (2), and [Cu(4,4'-bpy)(0.5)MoO(4)].1.5H(2)O (3.1.5H(2)O). The structures of 1-3 exhibit three-dimensional covalent frameworks, constructed from bimetallic oxide layers tethered by the dipodal organoimine ligands. However, the [CuMoO(4)] networks are quite distinct. For structure 1, the layer consists of corner-sharing [MoO(4)] tetrehedra and [CuN(2)O(3)] square pyramids, while the layer of 2 is constructed from [MoO(4)] tetrehedra and binuclear [Cu(2)O(6)N(2)] units of edge-sharing copper square pyramids. The oxide substructure of 3 consists of [MoO(4)] tetrahedra corner-sharing with tetranuclear clusters of edge-sharing [CuO(5)N] octahedra. Crystal data: C(10)H(8)N(2)O(4)CuMo (1), orthorhombic Pbca, a = 12.4823(6) A, b = 9.1699(4) A, c = 19.5647(9) A, V = 2239.4(1) A(3), Z = 8; C(5)H(4)NO(4)CuMo (2), triclinic P, a = 5.439(1) A, b = 6.814(1) A, c = 10.727(2) A, alpha = 73.909(4)(o), beta = 78.839(4)(o); gamma = 70.389(4)(o); V = 357.6(1) A(3), Z = 2; C(10)H(8)N(2)O(8)Cu(2)Mo(2).3H(2)O 3.1.5H(2)O, triclinic P, a = 7.4273(7) A, b = 9.2314(8) A, c = 13.880(1) A, alpha = 71.411(2)(o), beta = 88.528(2)(o), gamma = 73.650(2)(o), V = 863.4(1) A(3), Z = 2. The magnetic properties of 1-3 arise solely from the presence of the Cu(II) sites, but reflect the structural differences within the bimetallic oxide layers. Compound 1 exhibits magnetic behavior consistent with ferromagnetic chains which couple antiferromagnetically at low temperature. Compound 2 exhibits strong antiferromagnetic dimeric interactions, with the magnetic susceptibility data consistent with the Bleaney-Bowers equation. Similarly, the magnetic susceptibility of 3 is dominated by antiferromagnetic interactions, which may be modeled as a linear S = 1/2 Heisenberg tetramer.
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 distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.005 | 0.005 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.004 | 0.002 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.003 | 0.004 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.004 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.005 | 0.006 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
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; both teacher heads agree on what is shown here.
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".