Structural characterization of silver dialkylphosphite salts using solid‐state <sup>109</sup>Ag and <sup>31</sup>P NMR spectroscopy, IR spectroscopy and DFT calculations
Bibliographic record
Abstract
High-resolution solid-state (109)Ag and (31)P NMR spectroscopy was used to investigate a series of silver dialkylphosphite salts, Ag(O)P(OR)(2) (R = CH(3), C(2)H(5), C(4)H(9) and C(8)H(17)), and determine whether they adopt keto, enol or dimer structures in the solid state. The silver chemical shift, CS, tensors and |J((109)Ag, (31)P)| values for these salts were determined using (109)Ag (Xi = 4.652%) NMR spectroscopy. The magnitudes of J((109)Ag, (31)P) range from 1250 +/- 10 to 1318 +/- 10 Hz and are the largest reported so far. These values indicate that phosphorus is directly bonded to silver for all these salts and thus exclude the enol structure. All (31)P NMR spectra exhibit splittings due to indirect spin-spin coupling to (107)Ag (I = 1/2, NA = 51.8%) and (109)Ag (I = 1/2, NA = 48.2%). The (1)J((109)Ag, (31)P) values measured by both (109)Ag and (31)P NMR spectroscopy agree within experimental error. Analysis of (31)P NMR spectra of stationary samples for these salts allowed the determination of the phosphorus CS tensors. The absence of characteristic P=O stretching absorption bands near 1250 cm(-1) in the IR spectra for these salts exclude the simple keto tautomer. Thus, the combination of solid-state NMR and IR results indicate that these silver dialkylphosphite salts probably have a dimer structure. Values of silver and phosphorus CS tensors as well as (1)J((109)Ag, (31)P) values for a dimer model calculated using the density functional theory (DFT) method are in agreement with the experimental observations.
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) | 0.002 | 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".