Self-Assembly of Polymer and Sheet Structures in Palladium(II) Complexes Containing Carboxylic Acid Substituents
Bibliographic record
Abstract
A series of complexes trans-[PdCl(2)L(2)] has been prepared by the reaction of [PdCl(2)(PhCN)(2)] and/or Na(2)[PdCl(4)] with L = pyridine or quinoline ligands having one or two carboxylic acid groups. These complexes can form 1-D polymers through O-H.O hydrogen bonding between the carboxylic acid groups, as demonstrated by structure determinations of [PdCl(2)(NC(5)H(4)-4-COOH)(2)], [PdCl(2)(NC(5)H(4)-3-COOH)(2)], and [PdCl(2)(2-Ph-NC(9)H(5)-4-COOH)(2)]. In some cases, solvation breaks down the O-H.O hydrogen-bonded structures, as in the structures of [PdCl(2)(NC(5)H(4)-3-COOH)(2)].2DMSO and [PdCl(2)(2-Ph-NC(9)H(5)-4-COOH)(2)].4DMF, while pyridine-2-carboxylic acid underwent deprotonation to give the chelate complex [Pd(NC(5)H(4)-2-C(O)O)(2)]. The complexes trans-[PdCl(2)L(2)], L = pyridine-3,5-dicarboxylic acid or 2,6-dimethyl pyridine-3,5-dicarboxylic acid, self-assembled to give 2-D sheet structures, with hydrogen bonding between the carboxylic acid groups mediated by solvate methanol or water molecules. In the cationic complexes [PdL'(2)L(2)](2+) (L'(2) = Ph(2)PCH(2)PPh(2), Ph(2)P(CH(2))(3)PPh(2); L = pyridine carboxylic acid; anions X(-) = CF(3)SO(3)(-)), hydrogen bonding between the carboxylic acid groups and anions or solvate acetone molecules occurred, and only in one case was a polymeric complex formed by self-assembly.
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 | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 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".