The 1:1 adduct of triphenylsilanol and 4,4′-bipyridyl, and three pairwise-concomitant triclinic polymorphs of the 4:1 adduct having <i>Z</i>′ = 0.5, 1 and 4
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Crystallization from methanol solution of mixtures of triphenylsilanol and 4,4'-bipyridyl has given a 1:1 adduct (I), Ph(3)SiOH.C(10)H(8)N(2), and three polymorphic 4:1 adducts (II)-(IV), (Ph(3)SiOH)(4).C(10)H(8)N(2). In (I), the components are linked by a single O-H...N hydrogen bond and by a number of C-H...pi(arene) hydrogen bonds to form a continuous three-dimensional structure. Compounds (II)-(IV) are all triclinic, space group P-1, with Z' values of 0.5, 1 and 4, respectively. The basic hydrogen-bonded aggregate is the same in each of (II)-(IV), having a pair of silanol molecules linked to the bipyridyl via O-N...N hydrogen bonds and a further pair of silanol molecules linked to the first pair via O-H...O hydrogen bonds. In (II) there is just one such aggregate lying across a centre of inversion (Z' = 0.5) and in (III) there are two such aggregates, both lying across centres of inversion (Z' = 2 x 0.5 = 1). In (IV) there are six independent aggregates of this type, four of which lie across centres of inversion and two of which lie in general positions, so that Z' = (4 x 0.5) + 2 = 4. While the components in (I) are fully ordered, each of (II)-(IV) exhibits extensive disorder involving both the bipyridyl units and the phenyl rings of the silanol components.
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) | 0.005 | 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; 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".