Not Too Big and Not Too Small: “Goldilocks” Anion Size for Three-Dimensional Metal–Organic Frameworks Containing Oligothiophene Dinitrile Ligands (C<sub>4</sub>H<sub>2</sub>S)<sub><i>n</i></sub>(CN)<sub>2</sub> (<i>n</i> = 1, 2, 3) Bridging Silver(I) Cations
Bibliographic record
Abstract
A series of oligothiophene dinitriles, containing one, two, or three oligothiophene rings between nitrile donors NC-(C 4 H 2 S) n -CN are reacted with silver(I) salts to form coordination compounds. In most cases, the resulting metal–organic frameworks are one-dimensional coordination polymers containing roughly linear divalent Ag(I) centers. However, in the case of bithiophene ( n = 2) and terthiophene ( n = 3) bridges, a three-dimensional structure is also possible if the silver(I) counterion is just the right size to fit into the diamondoid pores that form with four-coordinate tetrahedrally oriented Ag(I) centers. Thus, only ClO 4 – and BF 4 – form three-dimensional structures with the bithiophene-bridged ligands, while the larger CF 3 SO 3 – and SbF 6 – anions will support a three-dimensional structure for the terthiophene-bridged ligand. Any counterion larger or smaller than the “just right” size will result in the one-dimensional structure instead.
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 | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| 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 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".