Electronic Structure Investigations of Neutral and Charged Ruthenium Bis(β-diketonate) Complexes of Redox-Active Verdazyl Radicals
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The electronic structures of (Vd)Ru(LX)(2) complexes (Vd = 1,5-diisopropyl-3-(2-pyridyl)-6-oxoverdazyl radical; LX = acac or hfac) as neutral, cationic, and anionic species have been investigated experimentally and computationally to probe the interplay between the ruthenium ion and the redox-active verdazyl ligand. The cationic complexes were prepared by oxidation of the corresponding neutral species with silver(I) salts. The hfac-based anionic complex was synthesized by reduction of the neutral species with cobaltocene, but the anionic acac analogue could not be prepared. Experimental (X-ray structures, electronic spectra) and computational (TD-DFT (PCM)) studies reveal that the expression of redox activity of the ligand and metal moieties is highly sensitive to the nature of the ancillary ligands on ruthenium. In the hfac series, the cationic, neutral, and anionic complexes can, respectively, be adequately described as Ru(II) complexes of a coordinated verdazyl cation, neutral radical, and anion. However, the more electron-donating acac coligands facilitate a stronger interaction between ruthenium and verdazyl via Ru(d) to Vd(π*) backbonding which is dependent on the overall charge of the complex and has the net effect of creating a high degree of metal-ligand covalency. Studies on the two cationic complexes reveal further distinctions between the acac- and hfac-containing systems: whereas the former has a significant open-shell singlet contribution to the complex ground state, this open-shell formulation is a minor component of the latter.
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) | 0.003 | 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".