MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2013590822 · doi:10.1002/ejic.200600686

Bis(formamidine–urea) Complexes of Ni<sup>II</sup> and Cu<sup>II</sup>:Synthesis, Characterization, and Reactivity

2006· article· en· W2013590822 on OpenAlexfundno aff
David Díaz Díaz, Sayam Sen Gupta, J. Kuzelka, M. Cymborowski, Michal Sabat, M. G. Finn

Bibliographic record

VenueEuropean Journal of Inorganic Chemistry · 2006
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicMetal complexes synthesis and properties
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersUniversity of California, San DiegoThailand Science Research and InnovationMinisterio de Educación, Cultura y DeporteMcMaster University
KeywordsChemistryReactivity (psychology)DeprotonationLigand (biochemistry)AmideElectron paramagnetic resonanceNickelMoietyCyclic voltammetryCrystallographyRedoxMedicinal chemistryChelationInorganic chemistryStereochemistryElectrochemistryIonPhysical chemistryOrganic chemistry

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract A novel chelating chiral bis(formamidine–urea) ligand was synthesized and used to prepare the corresponding Ni II and Cu II complexes. Spectroscopic and X‐ray crystallographic analysis of the former revealed that the urea moiety of the acyclic tetradentate ligand is deprotonated and binds to the square‐planar Ni 2+ ion through amide nitrogen atoms. This complex showed quasi‐reversible redox behavior in cyclic voltammetry, with E 1/2 = 640 mV vs. Cp 2 Fe + /Cp 2 Fe corresponding to the Ni III /Ni II couple. The Cu complex was shown by EPR spectroscopy to also adopt a square‐planar geometry [ g ∥ = 2.25 ( A ∥ = 184 G), g ⟂ = 2.06 at 6 K], and reduction was found to be irreversible, perhaps due to the rigid nature of the tetradentate ligand. The nickel complex was found to be a modestly active catalyst for epoxidation of electron‐richalkenes under Mukaiyama’s conditions, likely involving a radical mechanism. (© Wiley‐VCH Verlag GmbH &amp; Co. KGaA, 69451 Weinheim, Germany, 2006)

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: Bench or experimental
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.078
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.016
GPT teacher head0.208
Teacher spread0.191 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

Study designBench or experimental
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations6
Published2006
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueEuropean Journal of Inorganic ChemistrySame topicMetal complexes synthesis and propertiesFrench-language works237,207