Can a highly flexible copper(<scp>i</scp>) cluster-containing 1D and 2D coordination polymers exhibit MOF-like properties?
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The reaction of CuI with the highly flexible dithioether ligand p-TolS(CH2)8STol-p affords both in MeCN or in EtCN the 2D coordination polymers [Cu8I8{p-TolS(CH2)8STol-p}3(solvent)2]n (1·MeCN and 1·EtCN) containing octanuclear Cu8I8 clusters as connection nodes. In contrast, treatment of CuI with p-tBuC6H4S(CH2)8SC6H4But-p in EtCN solution leads to the formation of the luminescent 1D CP [Cu4I4{tBuC6H4S(CH2)8SC6H4-tBu}2(EtCN)2]n (2·EtCN) incorporating Cu4(μ3-I)4 clusters of the closed cubane type as secondary building units (SBUs). The 2D coordination polymers 1·MeCN and 1·EtCN demonstrate the ability to lose their solvent crystallisation molecules under vacuum and readsorb the same or a new one using vapor as monitored by powder X-ray diffraction, thermogravimetric, IR, chromaticity, emission spectra and emission lifetime measurements. Conversely, the 1D material 2·EtCN does not readsorb EtCN, likely due to the collapse of the macrocycles formed by the metal cluster nodes and flexible long-chained ArSC8SAr ligands but absorbs a smaller substrate such as CO2.
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) | 0.001 | 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".