Coinage metal complexes supported by a “PN<sup>3</sup>P” scaffold
Bibliographic record
Abstract
A series of monovalent group 11 complexes, [2,6-{Ph2PNMe}2(NC5H3)]CuBr 1, [2,6-{Ph2PNMe}2(NC5H3)]CuOTf 2, [2,6-{Ph2PNMe}2(NC5H3)]AgOTf 3, and [2,6-{Ph2PNMe}2(NC5H3)](AuCl)24, supported by a neutral PN(3)P ligand have been synthesized and characterized by multinuclear NMR and single crystal X-ray diffraction studies. The variation of the coordination properties were analyzed and electronic structure calculations have been carried out to provide insight on the bonding details in these complexes. The Cu(I) complexes displayed an unusual coordination geometry with a tridentate pincer ligand and an overall four coordinate trigonal pyramidal geometry. In contrast the Ag(I) analogue displayed a bidentate κ(2)-P,P' ligation leaving the pyridyl-N atom uncoordinated and yielding a pyramidalized trigonal planar geometry around Ag. The bimetallic Au(I) complex completed the series and displayed a monodentate P-bonded ligand and a linear coordination geometry.
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) | 0.001 | 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".