A Combined Solid‐State NMR and X‐ray Crystallography Study of the Bromide Ion Environments in Triphenylphosphonium Bromides
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Multinuclear ((31)P and (79/81)Br), multifield (9.4, 11.75, and 21.1 T) solid-state nuclear magnetic resonance experiments are performed for seven phosphonium bromides bearing the triphenylphosphonium cation, a molecular scaffold found in many applications in chemistry. This is undertaken to fully characterise their bromine electric field gradient (EFG) tensors, as well as the chemical shift (CS) tensors of both the halogen and the phosphorus nuclei, providing a rare and novel insight into the local electronic environments surrounding them. New crystal structures, obtained from single-crystal X-ray diffraction, are reported for six compounds to aid in the interpretation of the NMR data. Among them is a new structure of BrPPh(4), because the previously reported one was inconsistent with our magnetic resonance data, thereby demonstrating how NMR data of non-standard nuclei can correct or improve X-ray diffraction data. Our results indicate that, despite sizable quadrupolar interactions, (79/81)Br magnetic resonance spectroscopy is a powerful characterisation tool that allows for the differentiation between chemically similar bromine sites, as shown through the range in the characteristic NMR parameters. (35/37)Cl solid-state NMR data, obtained for an analogous phosphonium chloride sample, provide insight into the relationship between unit cell volume, nuclear quadrupolar coupling constants, and Sternheimer antishielding factors. The experimental findings are complemented by gauge-including projector-augmented wave (GIPAW) DFT calculations, which substantiate our experimentally determined strong dependence of the largest component of the bromine CS tensor, δ(11), on the shortest Br-P distance in the crystal structure, a finding that has possible application in the field of NMR crystallography. This trend is explained in terms of Ramsey's theory on paramagnetic shielding. Overall, this work demonstrates how careful NMR studies of underexploited exotic nuclides, such as (79/81)Br, can afford insights into structure and bonding environments in the solid state.
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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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; 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".