One-Dimensional Coordination Polymers Incorporating Silver(I) Perfluorocarboxylate Cuboctahedral Clusters and the Bis(methylthio)methane Ligand
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Two topologically comparable complexes, [Ag6(CF3CO2)3(L1-Me)3(SCH3)3]infinity (1) and [Ag6(CF3CF2CO2)3(L1-Me)2(SCH3)3(H2O)]infinity (2), were prepared and characterized by single-crystal diffractometry. The structures consist of Ag12S6 clusters linked by bis(methylthio)methane ligands, L1-Me, thus forming 1D coordination polymers. The 12 Ag atoms of the cluster are situated at the corners of a distorted cuboctahedron. The sulfur atoms of the six mu4-SCH3 entities occupy a position approximately 0.8 A above the center of each of the square faces of the polyhedron. The cleavage of the C-S bond of some of the ligands occurs during the syntheses, producing the -SCH3 anions. The coordination of the silver atoms varies from 5 to 7. The Ag...Ag contacts range from 2.9250(5) to 3.3615(6) A and from 2.961(1) to 3.380(1) A for 1 and 2, respectively. A polymeric ribbon is obtained when four ligands link a given cluster to two others. The chains of 1, held only by van der Waals forces, pack in a hexagonal manner. The two water molecules in 2 (Ag-OH2 = 2.385(7) A) are coordinated to silver atoms of the cluster. They are also strongly hydrogen bonded to the oxygen atoms of two pentafluoropropionate groups, one within the cluster (O...O = 2.741(1) A), the other in an adjacent chain (O...O = 2.818(1) A). The chains, thus H bonded to one another, generate a 2D coordination network.
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".