Complexes of ditopic carbo- and thio-carbohydrazone ligands – mononuclear, 1D chain, dinuclear and tetranuclear examples
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Ligands based on carbo- and thio-carbohydrazone cores, modified with pyridine, carboxylate and oxime ends, have been examined. They display a tautomeric versatility based on the flexible nature of the hydrazone linkages, leading to varied coordination motifs. Examples of mononuclear (Co(II), Ni(II)), dinuclear (Co(III)), 1D chain (Cu(II)) and square [2 × 2] grid (Ni(II)) complexes are obtained. Ferromagnetic (Cu(II)) and antiferromagnetic (Ni(II)) exchange is observed, with spin coupling in the Ni(II)(4) square grids propagated through the μ-O and μ-S bridges. Weak antiferromagnetic exchange (J = -6.0 cm(-1)) is observed for the μ-O bridged grid, despite the large Ni-O-Ni angles (137-141°), while for the μ-S bridged grids much stronger exchange is observed (J = -148 cm(-1), -198 cm(-1)). This is much larger than expected based on the Ni-S-Ni bridge angles (151-169°), and is associated with the soft (less polarizing than oxygen) nature of the sulfur bridge, which would allow for much more efficient transmission of spin exchange than observed in the μ-O bridged case. Structures and variable temperature magnetic data are included, and spin exchange is analyzed using normal Heisenberg exchange models. No examples involving oxime (NO) bridging are reported, which reflects the positioning of the N,O and N,S donor combinations in each ligand, and the preferred coordination through these donor atoms.
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) | 0.002 | 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".