On The Preparation of Fluorine-18 Labelled XeF<sub>2</sub> and Chemical Exchange between Fluoride Ion and XeF<sub>2</sub>
Bibliographic record
Abstract
A recent report claims to have prepared [18F]XeF2 by exchange between a large stoichiometric excess of XeF2 and no-carrier-added 18F-, as salts of the [2,2,2-crypt-M+] (M = K or Cs) cations, in CH2Cl2 or CHCl3 solvents at room temperature. Attempts to repeat this work have proven unsuccessful and have led to a critical reinvestigation of chemical exchange between fluoride ion, in the form of anhydrous [N(CH3)4][F] and [2,2,2-crypt-K][F], and XeF2 in dry CH2Cl2 and CH3CN solvents. It was shown, by use of 19F and 1H NMR spectroscopies, that [2,2,2-crypt-K][F] rapidly reacts with CH3CN solvent to form HF2-, and with CH2Cl2 solvent to form HF2-, CH2ClF, and CH2F2 at room temperature. Moreover, XeF2 rapidly oxidizes 2,2,2-crypt in CH2Cl2 solvent at room temperature to form HF and HF2-. Thus, the exchange between XeF2 and no-carrier-added 18F- reported in the prior work arises from exchange between XeF2 and HF/HF2-, and does not involve fluoride ion. However, naked fluoride ion has been shown to undergo exchange with XeF2 under rigorously anhydrous and HF-free conditions. A two-dimensional 19F-19F EXSY NMR study demonstrated that [N(CH3)4][F] exchanges with XeF2 in CH3CN solvent, but exchange of HF2- with either XeF2 or F- is not detectable under these conditions. The exchange between XeF2 and F- is postulated to proceed by the formation of XeF3- as the exchange intermediate.
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 | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| 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".