The Effects of Anion Variation and Ligand Derivatization on Silver Coordination Networks Based upon Weaker Interactions
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This article presents a series of silver(I) coordination networks based upon nonchelating bidentate thioether ligands. Frameworks using AgOTs as the silver(I) starting material form two-dimensional frameworks and are quite stable as shown by differential scanning calorimetry/thermogravimetric analysis (DSC/TGA) data. The networks are sufficiently robust as to maintain the same layered motif when the basic skeleton of the ligand is sequentially derivatized with -OEt, OBu, and OHex groups. Crystal structures of the AgOTs complexes of the underivatized and bis(hexoxy) derivatives, compounds 5 and 8, respectively, are presented as well as powder X-ray diffraction (PXRD) data of the other complexes. For 5, C20H20S3O3Ag, crystal data are as follows: monoclinic, space group P2(1)/n, a = 11.8117(5) A, b = 7.8813(5) A, c = 22.3316(10) A, beta = 102.245(5) degrees, V = 2031.6(2) A(3), Z = 4. For 8, C30H44S3O6Ag, crystal data are as follows: triclinic, space group Ponebar a = 8.445(4) A, b = 10.855(5) A, c = 19.308(9) A, alpha = 84.53(1) degrees, beta = 78.76(1) degrees, gamma = 68.43(1) degrees V = 1613.9(13) A(3), Z = 2. Changing the silver(I) starting material to AgPF6 results in a shift to a one-dimensional structure, 9, as shown by X-ray crystallography and in highly compromised stability. For 9, C14H16S2N2PF6Ag, crystal data are as follows: monoclinic, space group P2/n, a = 11.9658(11) A, b = 3.9056(4) A, c = 19.6400(18) A, beta = 92.87(1) degrees, V = 916.70(15) A(3), Z = 4.
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 distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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) | 0.000 | 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 teacher head, 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".