Organoplatinum(IV) Complexes with Amide Groups: Supramolecular Structure as a Function of Ligand Flexibility
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract The oxidative addition of the benzyl bromide derivative 4‐BrCH 2 C 6 H 4 (CH 2 ) x C(=O)NH(CH 2 ) y ‐4‐C 6 H 4 ‐ t Bu ( A ), x = y = 0; ( B ), x = 0, y = 1; ( C ), x = 1, y = 0; ( D ), x = y = 1, to the dimethylplatinum(II) complex [PtMe 2 (bu 2 bipy)] ( 1 ), bu 2 bipy = 4,4′‐di‐ tert ‐butyl‐2,2′‐bipyridine, gave the corresponding amide‐substituted benzylplatinum(IV) complexes of the formula [PtBrMe 2 (4‐CH 2 C 6 H 4 (CH 2 ) x C(=O)NH(CH 2 ) y ‐4‐C 6 H 4 ‐ t Bu)(bu 2 bipy)], bu 2 bipy = 4,4′‐di‐ tert ‐butyl‐2,2′‐bipyridine, 2 – 5 . In the solid state, the complexes 2 – 5 undergo self‐assembly to give the supramolecular polymers 2 – 4 or the dimers 5 . Intermolecular N–H ··· Br‐Pt hydrogen bonds are favored over the typical NH ··· O=C hydrogen bonds found in organic amides. The carbonyl group may be hydrogen‐bonded to solvent or not involved in hydrogen bonding. The structures are dependent on the size and flexibility of the amide‐substituted benzyl group. In solution, the complexes 3 – 5 exhibited an equilibrium between the neutral complexes and the bromo‐bridged, ionic binuclear complexes [(μ‐Br){PtBrMe 2 (4‐CH 2 C 6 H 4 (CH 2 ) x C(=O)NH(CH 2 ) y ‐4‐C 6 H 4 ‐ t Bu)(bu 2 bipy)} 2 ]Br. (© Wiley‐VCH Verlag GmbH & Co. KGaA, 69451 Weinheim, Germany, 2009)
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.
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 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 | 0.001 |
| 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 it