Electronic Structure Description of a Doubly Oxidized Bimetallic Cobalt Complex with Proradical Ligands
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The geometric and electronic structure of a doubly oxidized bimetallic Co complex containing two redox-active salen moieties connected via a 1,2-phenylene linker was investigated and compared to an oxidized monomeric analogue. Both complexes, namely, CoL(1) and Co2L(2), are oxidized to the mono- and dications, respectively, with AgSbF6 and characterized by X-ray crystallography for the monomer and by vis-NIR (NIR = near-infrared) spectroscopy, electron paramagnetic resonance (EPR) spectroscopy, superconducting quantum interference device (SQUID) magnetometry, and density functional theory (DFT) calculations for both the monomer and dimer. Both complexes exhibit a water molecule coordinated in the apical position upon oxidation. [CoL(1)-H2O](+) displays a broad NIR band at 8500 cm(-1) (8400 M(-1) cm(-1)), which is consistent with recent reports on oxidized Co salen complexes (Kochem, A. et al., Inorg. Chem., 2012, 51, 10557-10571 and Kurahashi, T. et al., Inorg. Chem., 2013, 52, 3908-3919). DFT calculations predict a triplet ground state with significant ligand and metal contributions to the singularly occupied molecular orbitals. The majority (∼75%) of the total spin density is localized on the metal, highlighting both high-spin Co(III) and Co(II)L(•) character in the electronic ground state. Further oxidation of CoL(1) to the dication affords a low-spin Co(III) phenoxyl radical species. The NIR features for [Co2L(2)-2H2O](2+) at 8600 cm(-1) (17 800 M(-1) cm(-1)) are doubly intense in comparison to [CoL(1)-H2O](+) owing to the description of [Co2L(2)-2H2O](2+) as two non-interacting oxidized Co salen complexes bound via the central phenylene linker. Interestingly, TD-DFT calculations predict two electronic transitions that are 353 cm(-1) apart. The NIR spectrum of the analogous Ni complex, [Ni2L(2)](2+), exhibits two intense transitions (4890 cm(-1)/26 500 M(-1) cm(-1) and 4200 cm(-1)/21 200 M(-1) cm(-1)) due to exciton coupling in the excited state. Only one broad band is observed in the NIR spectrum for [Co2L(2)-2H2O](2+) as a result of the contracted donor and acceptor orbitals and overall CT character.
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".