Cadmium complexes of the tripodal [Te(N-<i>t</i>-Bu)<sub>3</sub>]<sup>2</sup> dianion and the HgCl<sub>2</sub> adduct of a tellurium diimide dimer
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The reactions of CdCl2 or HgCl2 with {Li2[Te(N-t-Bu)3]}2 in n-hexaneTHF give rise to two distinctly different types of product. In the former case the complexes [Li(THF)x][(CdCl)3{Te(N-t-Bu)3}2] (7a (x = 4), 7b (x = 3)) are obtained. The tetrasolvated complex 7a is a solvent-separated ion pair. The trisolvated complex 7b is a contact ion pair in which the fourth coordination site at the Li+ centre is occupied by one of the Cl ligands of the anion. The polycyclic anion in 7a and 7b is comprised of two tripodal [Te(N-t-Bu)3]2 dianions that exhibit different coordination modes to the three CdCl+ units. One ligand is N,N′-chelated to all three metal centres, and each nitrogen atom bridges two Cd atoms, whereas the other is bonded in a tris-N-monodentate fashion in 7b. In 7a there is an additional weak Cd-N interaction. The reaction of HgCl2 with {Li2[Te(N-t-Bu)3]}2 produces the adduct [t-BuNTe(µ-N-t-Bu)2TeN-t-Bu]HgCl2 (8), in which the dimeric tellurium diimide ligand in its cis(exo,exo) configuration is N,N′-chelated to mercury. Polymeric strands parallel to the b axis are formed by weak TeCl interactions (3.5248(16) Å, 3.5876(15) Å) involving both Cl atoms, but only one Te atom of the ligand. Key words: imido ligands, cadmium, mercury, tellurium.
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) | 0.002 | 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".