Terpyridine Molybdenum Dinitrogen Chemistry: Synthesis of Dinitrogen Complexes That Vary by Five Oxidation States
Bibliographic record
Abstract
A bimetallic molybdenum complex bridged by an activated dinitrogen ligand and supported by phosphine and terpyridine ligands, [{((Ph)Tpy)(PPh2Me)2Mo}2(μ2-N2)][BArF(24)]2 [(Ph)Tpy = 4'-Ph-2,2',6',2″-terpyridine; ArF(24) = (C6H3-3,5-(CF3)2)4], was synthesized and structurally characterized, and its electronic structure was determined using a combination of experimental and density functional theory computational methods. Each molybdenum atom is best described as molybdenum(II) bridged by a modestly activated [N2](2-) ligand. The cyclic voltammogram of [{((Ph)Tpy)(PPh2Me)2Mo}2(μ2-N2)](2+) displays two reversible reductive and two reversible oxidative features, prompting the preparation and characterization of a series of molybdenum dinitrogen compounds spanning five oxidation states ([{((Ph)Tpy)(PPh2Me)2Mo}2(μ2-N2)][BArF(24)]n, where n = 4, 3, 2, 1, 0). Raman and (15)N NMR spectroscopic data establish that the bridging nitrogen ligand remains intact across the redox series. Electron paramagnetic resonance spectroscopy was used to probe the nature of the unpaired electron in the mixed-valent electronic oxidized and reduced products. The singly occupied molecular orbital is principally metal-based in [{((Ph)Tpy)(PPh2Me)2Mo}2(μ2-N2)](3+) and ligand-localized in [{((Ph)Tpy)(PPh2Me)2Mo}2(μ2-N2)](+).
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) | 0.001 | 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".