MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2312820461 · doi:10.1021/jp0637678

Gas Phase Ion Thermochemistry of Tetraaza Complexes Such as CyclamM<sup>2+</sup> with H<sub>2</sub>O, CH<sub>3</sub>OH, NH<sub>3</sub>, and Other Ligands, Where M<sup>2+</sup> = Mn<sup>2+</sup>, Ni<sup>2+</sup>, Cu<sup>2+</sup>, and Zn<sup>2+</sup>

2006· article· en· W2312820461 on OpenAlexafffund
Arthur T. Blades, P. Kebarle

Bibliographic record

VenueThe Journal of Physical Chemistry A · 2006
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldChemistry
TopicMass Spectrometry Techniques and Applications
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Alberta
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada
KeywordsThermochemistryChemistryLigand (biochemistry)CyclamPhase (matter)Gas phasePhysical chemistryCrystallographyMetalAnalytical Chemistry (journal)Medicinal chemistryInorganic chemistryOrganic chemistry

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Tetraaza complexes with M(2+) were produced in the gas phase by Electrospray (ESI) of solutions containing salts of M(2+)dinitrates and a tetraaza compound such as cyclam. The complex CyclM(2+) formed in solution and transferred to the gas phase via ESI was introduced into a reaction chamber containing known partial pressures of a ligand L. Equilibria between CyclM(2+) and L establish CyclML(n)(2+) = CyclML(n-1)(2+) + L and the equilibrium constants K(n,n-1) are determined with a mass spectrometer. Determinations at different temperatures lead to not only the DeltaG(0)(n,n-1) values but also the DeltaH(0)(n,n-1) and DeltaS(0)(n,n-1) values. Data for n = 1, 2, and 3 were obtained for L = H(2)O and CH(3)OH. The DeltaG(0)(1,0), DeltaH(0)(1,0) as well as DeltaG(0)(2,1), DeltaH(0)(2,1) values, when M(2+) = Mn(2+) and Zn(2+), were larger than those for Ni(2+) and Cu(2+). The ligand field theory and the Irvine-Williams series predict a reverse order, i.e., stronger bonding with Ni(2+) and Cu(2+) for simple ligand reactions with M(2+). An examination of the differences of the reactions in solution and gas phase provides a rationale for the observed reverse order for the CyclM(2+) + L reactions. Differences between gas phase and solution are found also when M(2+) = Cu(2+), but the tetraaza macrocycle is changed from, 12-ane to 14-ane to 15-ane. The strongest bonding in solution is with the 14-ane while in the gas phase it is with the 15-ane. Bond free energies, DeltaG(0)(1,0), for CyclCu(2+) with L = H(2)O, CH(3)OH, NH(3), C(2)H(5)OH, C(3)H(7)OH, (C(2)H(5))(2)O, and CH(3)COCH(3), are found to increase in the above order. The order and magnitude of the DeltaG(0)(1,0) values is close to DeltaG(0)(1,0) values observed with potassium K(+) and the same ligands. These results show that the cyclam in CyclCu(2+) leads to an extensive shielding of the +2 charge of Cu(2+). Ligands with gas phase basicities that are relatively high, lead to deprotonation of CyclM(2+). The deprotonation varies with the nature of M(2+) and provides information on the extent of electron transfer from the N atoms of the cyclam, to the M(2+) ions.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: Bench or experimental
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.002
Threshold uncertainty score0.007

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.008
GPT teacher head0.237
Teacher spread0.229 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designBench or experimental
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations10
Published2006
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueThe Journal of Physical Chemistry ASame topicMass Spectrometry Techniques and ApplicationsFrench-language works237,207