Reaction products of diorganotin(IV) oxides, R<sub>2</sub>SnO, with nitric acid. Part 2 – R = <i>n</i>-butyl and <i>t</i>-butyl
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The reaction of diorganotin(IV) oxides, R2SnO with R = n-butyl and t-butyl, with nitric acid in different stoichiometric ratios resulted in the formation of different products depending on the organic groups attached to the tin atom: the diorganotin(IV) dinitrate dihydrates, n-Bu2Sn(NO3)2·2H2O (2d) and t-Bu2Sn(NO3)2·2H2O (2e), the mixed diorganotin(IV) nitrate methoxide oxide n-Bu2Sn(NO3)(n-Bu2SnOMe)O (6), and the diorganotin(IV) nitrate hydroxide hydrate t-Bu2Sn(NO3)(OH)·H2O = [t-Bu2Sn(OH)(H2O)][NO3] (7). On examination of the solubility of the primary reaction products in different solvents, the three additional compounds t-Bu2Sn(NO3)(OH)·DMSO (8), t-Bu2Sn(NO3)(OH)·THF, and 2-t-Bu2Sn(NO3)(OH)·DMF = [t-Bu2Sn(OH)dmf]2[NO3]2·[t-Bu2Sn(NO3)OH]2 (9) could be isolated. All compounds have been structurally characterized by single crystal X-ray diffraction (primary results for 7) with special attention paid to dimensionality (2d and 2c = monomeric, hydrogen bonded molecules; 6 = dimeric molecules of ladder-type structure; 7 = dimeric cation; 8 = dimeric molecule with hydrogen bonded solvent molecules; 9 = both components dimeric), tin coordination (6, 7, 8, and 9 = trigonal bipyramidal; 2d and 2e = eightfold), and nitrate bonding modes (7 and 9 = isolated, hydrogen bonded; 6, 8, and 9 (component 2) = monodentate; 2d and 2e = symmetrical bidentate), the latter one being analyzed using both Sn–O and N–O distances.
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) | 0.001 | 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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
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".