Mercury(ii) penicillamine complex formation in alkaline aqueous solution
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The complex formation between mercury(II) and penicillamine (H(2)Pen = 3,3'-dimethyl cysteine) in alkaline aqueous solutions (pH approximately 2) has been investigated with extended X-ray absorption fine structure (EXAFS) and 199Hg NMR spectroscopy. By varying the penicillamine concentration (C(H(2)Pen) = 0.2-1.25 M) in approximately 0.1 M Hg(II) solutions, two coexisting major species [Hg(Pen)2](2-) and [Hg(Pen)3](4-) were characterized with mean Hg-S bond distances 2.34(2) and 2.44(2) A, respectively. The [Hg(Pen)2](2-) complex with two deprotonated penicillamine ligands forms an almost linear S-Hg-S entity with two weak chelating Hg-N interactions at the mean Hg-N distance 2.52(2) A. The same type of coordination is also found for the corresponding [Hg(Cys)2](2-) complex in alkaline aqueous solution with the mean bond distances Hg-S 2.34(2) A and Hg-N 2.56(2) A. The relative amounts of the [Hg(Pen)2](2-) and [Hg(Pen)3](4-) complexes were estimated by fitting linear combinations of the EXAFS oscillations to the experimental spectra. Also their (199)Hg NMR chemical shifts were used to evaluate the complex formation, showing that the [Hg(Pen)3](4-) complex dominates already at moderate excess of the free ligand ([Pen(2-)] > approximately 0.1 M).
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 | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| 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 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".