A third polymorph of 4-(2,6-difluorophenyl)-1,2,3,5-dithiadiazolyl
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The crystal structure of a third polymorphic form of the known 4-(2,6-difluorophenyl)-1,2,3,5-dithiadiazolyl radical, C(7)H(3)F(2)N(2)S(2), is reported. This new polymorph represents a unique crystal-packing motif never before observed for 1,2,3,5-dithiadiazolyl (DTDA) radicals. In the two known polymorphic forms of the title compound, all of the molecules form cis-cofacial dimers, such that two molecules are pi-stacked with like atoms one on top of the other, a common arrangement for DTDA species. By contrast, the third polymorph, reported herein, contains two crystallographically unique molecules organized such that only 50% are dimerized, while the other 50% remain monomeric radicals. The dimerized molecules are arranged in the trans-antarafacial mode. This less common dimer motif for DTDA species is characterized by pi-pi interactions between the S atoms [S...S = 3.208 (1) A at 110 K], such that the two molecules of the dimer are related by a centre of inversion. The most remarkable aspect of this third polymorph is that the DTDA dimers are co-packed with monomers. The monomeric radicals are arranged in one-dimensional chains directed by close lateral intermolecular contacts between the two S atoms of one DTDA heterocycle and an N atom of a neighbouring coplanar DTDA heterocycle [S...N = 2.857 (2) and 3.147 (2) A at 110 K].
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 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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".