Group 11 Complexes of the<i>P</i>,<i>Te</i>-Centered Ligand [TeP<sup>i</sup>Pr<sub>2</sub>NP<sup>i</sup>Pr<sub>2</sub>]<sup>−</sup>: Synthesis, Structures, and Insertion Reactions of the Copper(I) Complex with Chalcogens
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The lithium reagent [LiTeP(i)Pr(2)NP(i)Pr(2)] undergoes metathetical reactions with group 11 chlorides to give the complexes {M(TeP(i)Pr(2)NP(i)Pr(2))}(3) (6: M = Cu; 7: M = Ag) and (Ph(3)P)Au(TeP(i)Pr(2)NP(i)Pr(2)) (8) as yellow crystalline solids. These new complexes were characterized by single crystal X-ray diffraction and multinuclear NMR spectroscopy. The tellurium atoms in the trimeric complexes 6 and 7 occupy bridging positions to give a Cu(3)Te(3) ring in a twist-boat conformation with short M...M contacts (M = Cu, Ag). Variable temperature (31)P NMR and ESI-MS spectra for 6 and 7 give evidence for the formation of several oligomers in tetrahydrofuran solution. The reactions of 6 with dioxygen (or Me(3)NO), elemental sulfur, or red selenium generate the chalcogen-insertion products {Cu(TeP(i)Pr(2)NP(i)Pr(2)E)}(3) (9: E = O; 10: E = S; 11: E = Se), which were also structurally characterized by single crystal X-ray diffraction and multinuclear NMR spectroscopy. The lighter chalcogens are two-coordinate while the tellurium centers occupy bridging positions in the trimeric complexes 9-11 giving rise to Cu(3)Te(3) rings in a chairlike conformation.
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 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| 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; both teacher heads agree on what is shown here.
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".