Correction to Synthesis and Structures of Scandium and Lutetium Benzyl Complexes
Bibliographic record
Abstract
In the article, the broad signals observed in the 1H NMRspectrum of [Lu(CH2Ph)3(THF)3], obtained in Edmonton, in THF-d8 at RT and the two sets of signals at LT were attributed to some fluxional behavior. Subsequently, KS discovered1 that the actual reason for this was the presence of the ate-complex, K[Lu(CH2Ph)4(THF)x], in the sample. The Edmonton synthesis was repeated several times, but in each case, it was accompanied by the formation of variable amounts of the ate-complex contami-nation, as determined by 1H NMR spectroscopy in THF-d8. Although crystals of [Lu(CH2Ph)3(THF)3] were obtained from such preparations, in our hands, pure neutral tribenzyl was best obtained by trituration/extraction of the crude product with toluene, which gave [Lu(CH2Ph)3(THF)2] with two coordinated THF molecules (structure at hand) but with loss of yield. Figure 1 shows the 1H NMR spectra of pure [Lu(CH2Ph)3(THF)3], the ate-complex, and mixture of the two in THF-d8 at LT; the 1H NMR spectra of the former two complexes are temperature-invariant except for minor changes in chemical shifts, whereas that of the mixture shows broad signals at RT due to intermolecular exchange. JT regrets the error and wishes to emphasize that the problem with ate-complex formation was only observed in the Edmonton synthetic protocol and workup procedure. Alternative, large-scale synthesis of [Ln(CH2Ph)3(THF)3] 2 and most recently including that of [Lu(CH2Ph)3(THF)3] has appeared. 3
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 distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| 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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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 teacher head, 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".