A novel ruthenium surfactant: electronic spectra, ZINDO analysis and Langmuir–Blodgett studies of trans-dichloro(6,6′-bis(N-dodecylbenzimidazol-2-yl)-2,2′-bipyridine)ruthenium(II) †
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The complex, dichloro(6,6′-bis(N-dodecylbenzimidazol-2-yl)-2,2′-bipyridine)ruthenium(II), Ru(ddbbbpy)Cl2 was prepared from the reaction of the free ligand and RuCl2(Me2SO)4. Structural characterization of the compound by 1H NMR revealed that 6,6′-bis(N-dodecylbenzimidazol-2-yl)-2,2′-bipyridine ligand lies symmetrically about the equatorial plane with the chlorides axial to each other. The electronic structure of the compound shows several ligand π–π* transitions in the ultraviolet and a broad dπ–pπ* MLCT manifold in the visible region of the spectrum. A ZINDO/S calculation reproduces, in some detail, the general features of the electronic spectrum of the title species. The electronic characteristics of the frontier orbitals are analysed. The parent neutral compound shows a fully reversible oxidation wave at −0.04 V vs. the Cp2Fe+/Cp2Fe couple in 0.1 M (C4H9)4NPF6/CH2Cl2. The low temperature (77 K) EPR spectrum of the one-electron oxidized product is typical for a rhombohedrally distorted Ru(III) complex with g values of 2.73, 2.20 and 1.82. Surface analysis of the parent complex as studied using Langmuir–Blodgett methods show a typical isotherm from which an area per molecule of 126 Å2 can be derived. Thin films of the complex were readily transferred to quartz and indium doped tin oxide (ITO) plates. Thin films are conductive as indicated by the cyclic voltammetry of the complexes on ITO slides.
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 | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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; 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".