Boxes, Helicates, and Coordination Polymers: A Structural and Magnetochemical Investigation of the Diverse Coordination Chemistry of Simple Pyridine-Alcohol Ligands
Bibliographic record
Abstract
A structurally diverse array of polynuclear complexes has been identified and structurally characterized from the reaction of 6-methylpyridine-2-methanol (1) with a range of cobalt(II) salts under a variety of reaction conditions. A tetranuclear cubane, [Co4(1-H)4Cl4(H2O)3(CH3OH)], was isolated from the reaction of 1 with CoCl2.6H2O and NaOH in MeOH, and a tetranuclear double cubane, [Co4(1-H)6(NO3)2], was isolated from the reaction of 1 with Co(NO3)2.6H2O and NEt3 in MeOH. A bowl-shaped trinuclear complex, [Co3(1-H)3Cl3(dmso)], which features a triply bridging dmso ligand, assembled upon mixing 1 and CoCl2.6H2O in dmso. A 1-D coordination polymer, [Co(1)2(SO4)](infinity), where the sulfate ligands bridge "[Co(1)2]" units in a mu2:eta1 fashion to build up the polymer structure, was isolated from the reaction of 1 with CoSO4.7H2O. The reaction of the structurally related ligand 8-hydroxyquinaldine (2) with a mixture of CoCl2.6H2O and Co(OAc)2.4H2O lead to the formation of the tetranuclear double cubane, [Co4(2-H)6Cl2]. Temperature-dependent magnetic measurements have also been performed for these five complexes along with the hydrogen-bonded helicate [Co2(1)2(1-H)2]. The hydrogen bonds of the helicate mediate antiferromagnetic interactions between the cobalt(II) centers (J = -3.18(9) cm(-1), g = 2.25(2)). The sulfate bridging ligands of [Co(1)2(SO4)](infinity) are poor mediators of magnetic exchange. The Co(II) centers in the double-cubane complexes [Co4(1-H)6(NO3)2] and [Co4(2-H)6Cl2] are strongly antiferromagnetically coupled to each other at low temperature to give an S = 0 ground state. [Co4(1-H)4Cl4(H2O)3(MeOH)] exhibits rather complicated magnetic behavior; however, we did not observe any evidence for single-molecule magnetism as was seen for structurally related 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 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) | 0.001 | 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".