Two rhodamine derivatives: 9-[2-(ethoxycarbonyl)phenyl]-3,6-bis(ethylamino)-2,7-dimethylxanthylium chloride monohydrate and 3,6-diamino-9-[2-(methoxycarbonyl)phenyl]xanthylium chloride trihydrate
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The title compounds, C28H31N2O3(+)-Cl(-)-H2O (common name rhodamine-6g), (I), and C21H17N2O3(+)-Cl(-)-3H2O (common name rhodamine-123), (II), both have planar xanthene skeletons with a formal +1 charge on the amino N atoms delocalized through the pi-electron system so that the N-Csp(2) bond distances indicate significant double-bond character. The substituted planar phenyl groups make angles of 63.29 (8) and 87.96 (11) degrees with the xanthene planes in (I) and (II), respectively. In both molecules, the carbonyl bond vectors point toward the xanthene rings. The ethylamine groups in (I) are oriented similarly with their CH2-CH3 bond vectors pointing nearly perpendicular to the xanthene plane. The chloride ions and water molecules are disordered in both structures. In (I), the chloride ion and water molecule are disordered between two sites. One water and chloride alternately occupy the same site with occupancy factors of 0.5. The other 0.5-chloride and 0.5-water occupy two distinct positions separated by 0.747 (8) A. In (II), the chloride ion is disordered between three sites and one of the waters is disordered about two other sites. Both crystal structures are stabilized by hydrogen bonds involving the chloride ions, amino groups and water molecules, as well as by pi-pi stacking between xanthene planes.
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 | 0.001 | 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".