Hydrogen Bonding Motifs of <i>N,N‘,N‘ ‘</i>-Trisubstituted Guanidinium Cations with Spherical and Rodlike Monoanions: Syntheses and Structures of I<sup>-</sup>, I<sub>3</sub><sup>-</sup>, and SCN<sup>-</sup> Salts
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The trisubstituted guanidines N, N ‘, N ‘ ‘-triisopropylguanidine (TPG) and N, N ‘ -diisopropyl- N ‘ ‘-2,6-dimethylphenylguanidine (DPArG) react with ammonium iodide in water to produce the iodide salts (TPGHNH 3 )I ( 1 ) and (DPArGH)I ( 2 ). Compound 1 displayed a complex cation that consisted of a 1:1 ratio of TPG and ammonium cation, and the solid-state structure of this compound is a three-dimensional hydrogen-bonded network in which all three guanidine nitrogens are involved in hydrogen bonding with a three-coordinate iodide anion. The orientation of the N-substituents of the cation in 2 led to hydrogen-bonded cation/anion chains. Triiodide salts, TPGH + I 3 - ( 3 ) and DPArGH + I 3 - ( 4 ), are also reported. The primary structures of 3 and 4 consist of hydrogen-bonded dimers. The shortest NH···I interactions for 3 are with one terminal and the central I atoms, while in 4 the two hydrogen-bonding interactions are to the terminal I centers. A third, slightly longer NH···I interaction in 3 led to an extended double layer chain structure. In 4, an NH interaction with the aromatic ring of an adjacent dimeric unit generated chains of dimers. The reaction between TPG and NH 4 SCN produced TPGH + SCN - ( 5 ) with a structure displaying two cystallographically unique cations, each with three hydrogen bonds to the thiocyanate anions. Two structural subunits were identified, a dimeric (TPGH + SCN - ) 2 unit and a cation/anion chain, and these are cross-linked via hydrogen-bonding interactions to yield the 3-D structure for 5 .
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".