MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1994714428 · doi:10.1002/ejic.200390023

Anionic Cyclopentadienyl C<sub>60</sub> Complexes of Molybdenum and Tungsten; The Strange Case of Iron

2002· article· en· W1994714428 on OpenAlexaff
David M. Thompson, Marni Jones, Michael C. Baird

Bibliographic record

VenueEuropean Journal of Inorganic Chemistry · 2002
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldChemistry
TopicOrganometallic Complex Synthesis and Catalysis
Canadian institutionsQueen's University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsChemistryRadicalHomolysisMolybdenumCyclopentadienyl complexMetalPhotodissociationTungstenPhotochemistryElectron transferMetal carbonylInorganic chemistryOrganic chemistryCatalysis

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Thermal and photochemical reactions of the carbonylate salts A[(η5‐C5H5)Fe(CO)2], A[(η5‐C5H5)Mo(CO)3] and A[(η5‐C5H5)W(CO)3] (A = Na, PPN) in THF with C60 result in all cases in electron transfer to give [C60]− and the transient 17‐electron, metal‐centered radicals CpFe(CO)2, CpMo(CO)3 and CpW(CO)3, respectively. Subsequent self‐coupling of the three metal‐centred radicals then results in the formation of the metal‐metal bonded dimers [CpFe(CO)2]2, [CpMo(CO)3]2 and [CpW(CO)3]2. In contrast, while the mixture of Na[C60] and [CpFe(CO)2]2 does not react further under photochemical conditions, photolysis of mixtures of Na[C60] and both [CpMo(CO)3]2 and [CpW(CO)3]2 ultimately results in complete homolysis of the dimers and regeneration of the corresponding metal‐centered radicals, which then combine with the [C60]− remaining in solution to form the η2‐C60 complexes A[CpMo(CO)2(η2‐C60] and A[CpW(CO)2(η2‐C60]. (© Wiley‐VCH Verlag GmbH & Co. KGaA, 69451 Weinheim, Germany, 2003)

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)0.000
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 score0.003
Threshold uncertainty score0.009

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
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)0.0030.000

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 head0.013
GPT teacher head0.191
Teacher spread0.178 · 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

Citations13
Published2002
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueEuropean Journal of Inorganic ChemistrySame topicOrganometallic Complex Synthesis and CatalysisFrench-language works237,207