Double-Helical Dinuclear Bis(dipyrromethene) Complexes Formed by Self-Assembly
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Bis(dipyrromethene) ligands linked by an alkyl spacer between beta and beta' positions are shown to give helical dimers or monomers, dependent upon the length of the alkyl linker, upon complexation. Ligands consisting of methylene, ethylene, and propylene linkers -(CH(2))(n)()- (n = 1, 2, and 3) give helical dimers, while longer linking chains (n = 4, 5, or 6) give monomers or mixtures of dimers and monomers. X-ray crystal structures of the dimeric zinc complexes (n = 1, 2, and 3) reveal that the angles between dipyrromethene planes and the extent of helicity in the complexes differ as the length of the linker varies. The extent of helicity was assessed and found to be dependent upon the length and, specifically, the conformational preferences of the alkyl spacer unit. The presence of an ethylene linker gave complexes of greatest helicity. The use of a methylene spacer gave less helical structures upon complexation, while propylene spacers gave only slightly helical complexes. Our studies identify the crucial importance that the conformational preferences of the beta-beta' alkyl spacer group plays in the coordination algorithm of self-assembly to form dipyrromethene based 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".