Stereospecific Formation of Dinuclear Vanadium(V) Tartrato Complexes
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The first dinuclear nonperoxido tartrato complexes of vanadium(V), (NMe(4))(2)[V(2)O(4)((2R,3R)-H(2)tart)(2)] x 6 H(2)O (1), (NMe(4))(2)[V(2)O(2)((2R,3R)-tart)((2S,3S)-tart)] (2), (NEt(4))(2)[V(2)O(2)((2R,3R)-tart)((2S,3S)-tart)] (3) (tart = tartrato(4-) = C(4)H(2)O(6)(4-)) have been prepared from water-ethanol medium and characterized by X-ray structure analysis and spectral methods. The formation of the complexes has been found to be stereospecific; the composition and structure of anions containing one or both enantiomers of the ligand are profoundly different. The structure of anions in 1-3 also differs significantly from the structure of other dinuclear vanadium(V) alpha-hydroxycarboxylato complexes, but, interestingly, the geometry of the [V(2)O(2)((2R,3R)-tart)((2S,3S)-tart)](2-) ion resembles the structure of the [(VO)(2)((2R,3R)-tart)((2S,3S)-tart)](4-) ion which has a vanadium(IV) center. Using Raman and (51)V NMR spectroscopy the solvent dependent mutual transformations of [V(4)O(8)((2R,3R)-tart)(2)](4-) (V(4)L(2)-RR), [V(4)O(8)((2S,3S)-tart)(2)](4-) (V(4)L(2)-SS), [V(2)O(4)((2R,3R)-H(2)tart)(2)](2-) (V(2)L(2)-RR), [V(2)O(4)((2S,3S)-H(2)tart)(2)](2-) (V(2)L(2)-SS), and [V(2)O(2)((2R,3R)-tart)((2S,3S)-tart)](2-) (V(2)L(2)-rac) have been established. In aqueous solution the following reactions take place; 2 V(2)L(2)-rac --> V(2)L(2)-RR + V(2)L(2)-SS followed by partial decomposition, V(2)L(2)-RR --> V(4)L(2)-RR + 2 L (V(2)L(2)-SS --> V(4)L(2)-SS + 2 L). On the other hand V(2)L(2)-rac is stable in CH(3)CN solution while V(2)L(2)-RR (V(2)L(2)-SS) decomposes into several species.
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 | 0.001 |
| 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".