Syntheses, Structures, Spectroscopic Properties, and Thermal Behavior of Nickel(II) Mixed-Ligand Complexes with <i>N</i>,<i>N</i>,<i>N</i>′,<i>N</i>′-Tetramethylethylenediamine, Benzoylacetonate, and a Halide Anion
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract A series of nickel(II) complexes comprising N,N,N′,N′-tetramethylethylenediamine (tmen), benzoylacetonate (bzac), and a halide anion (X), Ni(tmen)(bzac)X·n(H2O)(n = 1–4, X = Cl, Br, I), have been synthesized. A crystallographic study revealed that the chloride anion coordinates to the central metal, while bromide and iodide anions are located in the outer coordination sphere as the counter anion; the metal has a slightly distorted octahedral geometry, and the two monodentate ligands (aqua and chloro) are in the cis-position. In bromide and iodide complexes, having two water molecules of crystallization, a ladder-like hydrogen bond network is formed among halide anions, aqua ligands, and water of crystallization. In a chloride complex having no water of crystallization, a dimer is formed by strong intermolecular hydrogen bonding between the aqua ligand and the chloro and the benzoylacetonate ligands of the neighboring molecule. The behaviors of the complexes in solution vary, depending on the nature of the solvents, including deaquation and disproportionation, causing contrasting color changes of the solutions. The presence of a proposed intermediate in the disproportionation reaction, namely a 5-coordinated complex, was confirmed. Thermal gravimetric analysis suggests that these complexes lose water of crystallization, undergo deaquation–anation, and then lose the coordinated water before disproportionation into two ternary complexes.
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 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 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 teacher head, 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".