Syntheses, Structures, and Fluxionality of Blue Luminescent Zinc(II) Complexes: Zn(2,2‘,2‘ ‘-tpa)Cl<sub>2</sub>, Zn(2,2‘,2‘ ‘-tpa)<sub>2</sub>(O<sub>2</sub>CCF<sub>3</sub>)<sub>2</sub>, and Zn(2,2‘,3‘ ‘-tpa)<sub>4</sub>(O<sub>2</sub>CCF<sub>3</sub>)<sub>2</sub> (tpa = Tripyridylamine)
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Three novel Zn(II) complexes containing either 2,2',2"-tripyridylamine (2,2',2"-tpa) or 2,2',3"-tripyridylamine (2,2',3"-tpa) have been synthesized and structurally characterized. Compound 1, Zn(2,2',2"-tpa)Cl2, has a tetrahedral geometry while compounds 2, Zn(2,2',2"-tpa)2(O2CCF3)2, and 3, Zn(2,2',3"-tpa)4(O2CCF3)2, have an octahedral geometry. The 2,2',2"-tpa ligand in 1 and 2 functions as a bidentate ligand, chelating to the zinc center, while the 2,2",3"-tpa ligand in 3 functions as a terminal ligand, binding to the zinc center through the 3-pyridyl nitrogen atom. All three compounds emit a blue color in solution and in the solid state. The emission maxima for the three compounds in solution are at lambda = 422, 426, and 432 nm, respectively. The blue luminescence of the complexes is due to a pi *-->pi transition of the tpa ligand as established by an ab initio calculation on the free ligand 2,2',2"-tpa and complex 1. Compounds 1 and 2 are fluxional in solution owing to an exchange process between the coordinate and noncoordinate 2-pyridyl rings of the 2,2',2"-tpa ligand. Compound 2 is also fluxional owing to a cis-trans isomerization process, as determined by variable-temperature 1H NMR spectroscopic analysis.
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 | 0.001 | 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".