Bibliographic record
Abstract
A synthetic route for iridium porphyrin amido complexes has been established. Treatment of a THF solution of Ir(ttp)(CO)Cl (1) (ttp = 5,10,15,20-tetrakis(p-tolyl)porphyrinato dianion) with an aqueous mixture of NaOH and NaBH4, followed by 2-iodoethanol leads to the clean formation of the β-hydroxyethyl complex Ir(ttp)(C2H4OH) (2) in 92% yield. Heating a pyridine solution of complex 2 in the presence of ca. 5–10 equiv. of phthalimide (HNC8H4O2; HPhth) leads to the formation of Ir(ttp)(C5H5N)(CH2CH2Phth) (3). The replacement of pyridine by THF as the reaction solvent leads to the formation of the THF adduct Ir(ttp)(THF)(Phth) (4), which has been characterized spectroscopically. Heating a solution of 4 in pyridine leads to the formation of Ir(ttp)(C5H5N)(Phth) (5), which has been isolated in 72% yield. Complexes 3 and 5 have been characterized by X-ray crystallographic studies. Complexes 4 and 5 are rare examples of monomeric late transition metal-amido complexes and are the first examples of iridium-amido complexes featuring a porphyrin as a supporting ligand.
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 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.005 | 0.002 |
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".