Double‐Decker Coordination Cages
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Bis(pyridin‐3‐ylmethyl) pyridine‐3,5‐dicarboxylate ( L ) possessing one internal and two terminal pyridine moieties displayed differential coordination ability when combined with suitable Pd II components. The compound L acted as a bidentate chelating ligand to form mononuclear complexes when combined with cis ‐[Pd(tmeda)(NO 3 ) 2 ] or Pd(NO 3 ) 2 in calculated ratios. The combination of Pd(NO 3 ) 2 with L in a ratio of 3:4, however, afforded the trinuclear “double‐decker” cage [(NO 3 ) 2 ⊂Pd 3 ( L ) 4 ](NO 3 ) 4 , in which L acts as a nonchelating tridentate ligand and the counter anion (i.e., NO 3 – ) acts as template. The encapsulated NO 3 – can be replaced by F – , Cl – , or Br – but not by I – . The F – ‐encapsulated cage could not be isolated due to its reactivity, whereas the Cl – or Br – encapsulated cages could be isolated. Although anionic guests such as NO 3 – , Cl – , or Br – stabilized the cages, the presence of excess Cl – or Br – (not NO 3 – ) facilitated decomplexation reactions releasing the ligand. The complexation of Pd(Y) 2 (Y = BF 4 – , PF 6 – , CF 3 SO 3 – , or ClO 4 – ) with L afforded the corresponding mononuclear complexes under appropriate conditions. However, these counter anions could not act as templates for the construction of double‐decker cages.
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 | 0.001 | 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) | 0.015 | 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".