Magnetic properties of isostructural M(H2O)4[Au(CN)4]2-based coordination polymers (M = Mn, Co, Ni, Cu, Zn) by SQUID and μSR studies
Bibliographic record
Abstract
A series of isomorphous M(H(2)O)(4)[Au(CN)(4)](2)·4H(2)O (M = Mn, Co, Ni, Zn; Cu is similar) coordination polymers was synthesized from the reaction of M(II) with KAu(CN)(4); they consist of octahedrally coordinated metal centres with four equatorial water molecules and trans-axial N-cyano ligands from [Au(CN)(4)](-) moieties, generating a linear 1-D chain of M(H(2)O)(4)[Au(CN)(4)]-units. An additional interstitial [Au(CN)(4)](-) unit forms AuN and hydrogen bonds with adjacent chains. The Cu(II) system readily loses water to yield Cu[Au(CN)(4)](2)(H(2)O)(4), which was not structurally characterized. The magnetic properties of these polymers were investigated by a combination of SQUID magnetometry and zero-field muon spin relaxation (ZF-μSR). Only weak antiferromagnetic interactions along the chains are mediated by the [Au(CN)(4)]-units, but the ZF-μSR data indicates that interchain interactions yield a phase transition to a magnetically ordered state for Cu[Au(CN)(4)](2)(H(2)O)(4) below 0.6 K, while for M(H(2)O)(4)[Au(CN)(4)](2)·4H(2)O (M = Co), depopulation of zero-field split Kramer's doublets to an effective "S = 1/2" ground state yields a transition to a spin-frozen magnetic state below 0.26 K. On the other hand, only a simple slowing-down of spins above 0.02 K is observed for the more weakly zero-field split M(H(2)O)(4)[Au(CN)(4)](2)·4H(2)O (M = Mn, Ni) complexes.
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 | 0.000 |
| 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 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 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".