Bonding Trends in Lewis Acid Adducts of S<sub>4</sub>N<sub>4</sub> – X‐ray Structure of TeCl<sub>4</sub>·S<sub>4</sub>N<sub>4</sub>
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract Tetrasulfur tetranitride and tellurium tetrachloride react in dichloromethane to form a 1:1 adduct TeCl 4 · S 4 N 4 ( 1 ). The crystal structure of 1 shows that TeCl 4 is bonded to the S 4 N 4 ring through a Te–N linkage. As a consequence, the transannular S ··· S bonds in S 4 N 4 are broken and the molecule assumes an open, monocyclic conformation. The Te–N bond of 2.16(1) Å is slightly longer than the single bond. The S–N bonds span a range of 1.55(1)–1.67(1) Å. The adduct 1 was also characterized by mass spectrometry and Raman spectroscopy. The bonding and spectroscopic properties of 1 are compared by DFT calculations at the B3PW91/(RLC ECP) level of theory with those of BF 3 · S 4 N 4 ( 2 ), SO 3 · S 4 N 4 ( 3 ), AsF 5 · S 4 N 4 ( 4 ), SbCl 5 · S 4 N 4 ( 5 ) for which experimental structural information is available. The structural and bonding trends in TeF 4 · S 4 N 4 ( 6 ), TeBr 4 · S 4 N 4 ( 7 ), and SeX 4 · S 4 N 4 [X = F ( 8 ), Cl ( 9 ), Br ( 10 )] are also discussed. (© Wiley‐VCH Verlag GmbH & Co. KGaA, 69451 Weinheim, Germany, 2006)
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 | 0.003 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.003 | 0.004 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.004 | 0.002 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.004 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.005 |
| 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; both teacher heads agree on what is shown here.
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".