MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1966581223 · doi:10.1139/v08-079

Hydrolysis of dimethylphenyltin(IV) and triphenyltin(IV) chlorides in different aqueous ethanol solutions

2008· article· en· W1966581223 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Morteza Jabbari, Farrokh Gharib, Mostafa M. Amini, Amirreza Azadmehr

Bibliographic record

VenueCanadian Journal of Chemistry · 2008
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldChemistry
TopicOrganometallic Compounds Synthesis and Characterization
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsChemistryAqueous solutionHydrolysisPolarizabilityPotentiometric titrationSolventHydrogen bondInorganic chemistryEthanolChloridePhysical chemistryOrganic chemistryMoleculeIon

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The hydrolysis of [(Me)2(Ph)Sn(IV)]+ and [(Ph)3Sn(IV)]+ has been investigated at 25 °C and different aqueous solutions of ethanol, using a combination of spectrophotometric and potentiometric techniques. The species formed together with their formation constants have been determined using the computer program Squad over a wide pH range of 1 to 11. The hydrolysis constants in different media were analyzed in terms of Kamlet and Taft parameters. Single-parameter correlation of the formation constants, K11 and K12, versus α (hydrogen-bond donor acidity), β (hydrogen-bond acceptor basicity), and π* (dipolarity/polarizability) for both cases are relatively poor in all solutions, but multiparameter correlation represents significant improvement with regard to the single-parameter models. In this work, we have also used the normalized polarity parameter, ETN, alone and in combination with the Kamlet–Taft parameter to find a better correlation of the formation constants in different aqueous ethanol solutions.Key words: dimethylphenyltin(IV) chloride, triphenyltin(IV) chloride, hydrolysis constant, aqueous ethanol solutions, solvent effect.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: Bench or experimental
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.002
Threshold uncertainty score0.003

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.016
GPT teacher head0.190
Teacher spread0.174 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designBench or experimental
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations11
Published2008
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCanadian Journal of ChemistrySame topicOrganometallic Compounds Synthesis and CharacterizationFrench-language works237,207