Influence of Ligand Rigidity and Ring Substitution on the Structural and Electronic Behavior of Trivalent Iron and Gallium Complexes with Asymmetric Tridentate Ligands
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Species 1-6 are [M(III)(L)2]ClO4 complexes formed with the PhO--CH=N-CH2-Py imines, (L(I))- and (L(tBuI))-, and PhO--CH2-NH-CH2-Py amines, (L(A))- and (L(tBuA))-, in which PhO- is a phenolate ring and Py is a pyridine ring and the prefix tBu indicates the presence of tertiary butyl groups occupying the positions 4 and 6 of the phenol ring. Monometallic species with d5 high-spin iron (1, 2, 3, 4) and d10 gallium (5, 6) were synthesized and characterized to assess the influence of the ligand rigidity and the presence of tertiary butyl-substituted phenol rings on their steric, electronic, and redox behavior. Characterization by elemental analysis, mass spectrometry, IR, UV-visible, and EPR spectroscopies, and electrochemistry has been performed, and complexes [FeIII(L(tBuI))2]ClO4 (2), [FeIII(L(tBuA))2]ClO4 (4), and [Ga(III)(L(tBuI))2]ClO4 (5) have been characterized by X-ray crystallography. The crystal structures show the imine ligands meridionally coordinated to the metal centers, whereas the amine ligands are coordinate in a facial mode. Cyclic voltammetry shows that the complexes with the ligands (L(tBuI))- and (L(tBuA))- were able to generate ligand-based phenoxyl radicals, whereas unsubstituted ligands displayed ill-defined redox processes. EPR spectroscopy supports high-spin configurations for the iron complexes. UV-visible spectra are dominated by charge-transfer phenomena, and imine compounds exhibit dramatic hyperchromism when compared to equivalent amines. The tertiary butyl groups on the phenolate ring enhance this trend. Detailed B3LYP/6-31G(d)-level calculations have been used to account for the results observed.
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".