Series of dinuclear and tetranuclear lanthanide clusters encapsulated by salen-type and β-diketionate ligands: single-molecule magnet and fluorescence properties
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Three dinuclear [Ln2H2OL(1)2(acac)2]·solvent (1, Ln = Gd, solvent = 2CH2Cl2; 2, Ln = Tb, no solvent; 3, Ln = Er, solvent = (C2H5)2O), and two tetranuclear lanthanide clusters [Ln4(μ3-OH)2L(2)2(acac)6]·2(solvent) (4, Ln = Tb, solvent = CH3OH; 5, Ln = Dy, solvent = CH3CN) were characterized in terms of structure, fluorescence and magnetism. The dinuclear lanthanide complexes were constructed by a rigid salen-type ligand H2L(1) = N,N'-bis(salicylidene)-o-phenylenediamine and β-diketonate (acac = acetylacetonate) ligands, while the tetranuclear clusters were formed from the flexible ligand H2L(2) = N,N'-bis(salicylidene)-1,2-ethanediamine. Crystal structure analysis indicates that the rigid ligand favors the double-decker sandwich structure (Ln2L(1)2), in which the two lanthanide ions have different coordination numbers and geometry, while the more flexible ligand (H2L(2)) leads to planar tetranuclear clusters. The relationship between their respective magnetic anisotropy and ligand-field geometries and their fluorescence properties was investigated. The Dy and Tb-containing clusters exhibit typical visible fluorescence properties, and single-molecule magnet behavior is seen in complex 5.
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.
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 | 0.000 | 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 | 0.001 |
| 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 it