Crystallographic and structural characterization of heterometallic platinum clusters. Part IX. Heterooligonuclear Pt clusters
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract This review classifies and analyzes over thirty heterooligonuclear platinum clusters with a wide variety of metal frameworks, from twelve to forty-four. There are thirteen heterometals (Ge, Sn, Hg, W, Mo, Ru, Rh, Pd, Os, Ni, Cu, Ag, Au) which are the partners of platinum. The clusters mostly crystallize in monoclinic (36,4%) and triclinic (30,3%) crystal classes. Their structures are complex, with platinum most commonly preferring interstitial sites, such as the centroids of icosahedrons. There are examples of distortion isomerism. The most common ligands are CO and PPh3, and it is interesting that the mean Pt-CO and M-CO bond distances are identical at 1.84 Å. In contrast, the mean Pt-μCO and M-μCO are of values of 2.02 and 1.97 Å, respectively, while the Pt-PPh3 and M-PPh3 bond distances are 2.30 and 2.28 Å, respectively. The shortest Pt-Pt, Pt-M (non-transition) and Pt-M (transition) bond distances are 2.559(2) Å, 2.412(2) Å (M = Ge) and 2.510(2) Å (M = Ni).
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.
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 | 0.000 |
| 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) | 0.000 | 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 it