Cluster carbonyls of the [Re6(μ3-Se)8]2+ core: synthesis, structural characterization, and computational analysis
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The reactions of the previously reported cluster complexes [Re(6)(mu(3)-Se)(8)(PEt(3))(5)I]I, trans-[Re(6)(mu(3)-Se)(8)(PEt(3))(4)I(2)], and cis-[Re(6)(mu(3)-Se)(8)(PEt(3))(4)I(2)] with the [Re(6)(mu(3)-Se)(8)](2+) core with CO in the presence of AgSbF(6) afforded the corresponding cluster carbonyls [Re(6)(mu(3)-Se)(8)(PEt(3))(5)(CO)][SbF(6)](2) (), trans-[Re(6)(mu(3)-Se)(8)(PEt(3))(4)(CO)(2)][SbF(6)](2) (), and cis-[Re(6)(mu(3)-Se)(8)(PEt(3))(4)(CO)(2)][SbF(6)](2) (). Infrared spectroscopy indicated weakening of the bond in CO, suggesting the existence of backbonding between the cluster core and the CO ligand(s). Electrochemical studies focusing on the reversible, one-electron oxidation of the cluster core revealed a large increase in the oxidation potential upon going from the acetonitrile derivatives to their carbonyl analogs, consistent with the depleted electron density of the cluster core upon CO ligation. Disparities between the IR spectra and oxidation potential between and indicate that electronic differences exist between sites trans and cis to the location of a ligand of interest. The active role played by the Se atoms in influencing the cluster-to-CO bonding interactions is suggested through this result and density functional (DF) computational analysis. The computations indicate that molecular orbitals near the HOMO account for backbonding interactions with a high percentage of participation of Se orbitals.
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) | 0.000 | 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) | 0.002 | 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 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".