Tetraphosphinite Resorcinarene Complexes: Silver(I) Capsule Complexes
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Resorcinarene tetraphosphinite ligands, P4, react with silver(I) trifluoroacetate or silver(I) triflate, AgX, to give the corresponding [Ag4X4(P4)] complexes. The resorcinarene skeleton in these complexes adopts a boat conformation with the silver(I) phosphinite units on the horizontal, rather than the upright, arene units of the resorcinarene. The [Ag4X4(P4)] complexes react with free P4 ligand to yield the [Ag2X2(P4)] or [AgX(P4)] complexes, which are characterized in solution by NMR spectroscopy to have a conformation opposite to that of the [Ag4X4(P4)] complexes; the silver(I) phosphinite groups are on the upright arene rings of the resorcinarene "boat" instead of the horizontal arene units. There is an easy equilibrium between these complexes. When X = triflate, the [Ag4X4(P4)] complexes disproportionate and add aqua ligands during slow crystallization to give "capsule complexes", which are characterized crystallographically as [Ag10(O3SCF3)10(OH2)6(P4)2], [Ag10(O3SCF3)6(OH2)8(P4)2][O3SCF3]4, or [Ag13(O3SCF3)13(OH2)7(P4)2] depending on the resorcinarene tetraphosphinite ligand P4 used. These unusual capsule complexes are formed by the tail-to-tail self-assembly of pairs of [Ag4(P4)]4+ units linked by additional silver ions that bind to the phenyl substituents of one resorcinarene through {Ag(eta2-C6H5)}+ binding and to the bridging triflate ligands, aqua ligands, or both of the other resorcinarene unit.
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 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 0.001 |
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".