Substitution of the Terminal Chloride Ligands of [Re<sub>6</sub>S<sub>8</sub>Cl<sub>6</sub>]<sup>4−</sup>with Triethylphosphine: Photophysical and Electrochemical Properties of a New Series of [Re<sub>6</sub>S<sub>8</sub>]<sup>2+</sup>Based Clusters
Bibliographic record
Abstract
A systematic substitution of the terminal chlorides coordinated to the hexanuclear cluster [Re(6)S(8)Cl(6)](4-) has been conducted. The following complexes: [Re(6)S(8)(PEt(3))Cl(5)](3-) (1), cis- (cis-2) and trans-[Re(6)S(8)(PEt(3))(2)Cl(4)](2-) (trans-2), mer- (mer-3) and fac-[Re(6)S(8)(PEt(3))(3)Cl(3)](-) (fac-3), and cis- (cis-4) and trans-[Re(6)S(8)(PEt(3))(4)Cl(2)] (trans-4) were synthesized and fully characterized. Compared to the substitution of the halide ligands of the related [Re(6)S(8)Br(6)](4-) and [Re(6)Se(8)I(6)](3-) clusters, the chloride ligands are slower to substitute which allowed us to prepare the first monophosphine cluster (1). In addition, the synthesis of fac-3 was optimized by using cis-2 as the starting material, which led to a significant increase in the overall yield of this isomer. Notably, we observed evidence of phosphine isomerization taking place during the preparation of the facial isomer; this was unexpected based on the relatively inert nature of the Re-P bond. The structures of Bu(4)N(+) salts of trans-2, mer-3, and fac-3 were determined using X-ray crystallography. All compounds display luminescent behavior. A study of the photophysical properties of these complexes includes measurement of the excited state lifetimes (which ranged from 4.1-7.1 μs), the emission quantum yields, the rates of radiative and non-radiative decay, and the rate of quenching with O(2). Quenching studies verify the triplet state nature of the excited state.
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) | 0.001 | 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 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".