Synthesis of a labile sulfur-centred ligand, [S(H)C(PPh<sub>2</sub>S)<sub>2</sub>]<sup>−</sup>: structural diversity in lithium(<scp>i</scp>), zinc(<scp>ii</scp>) and nickel(<scp>ii</scp>) complexes
Bibliographic record
Abstract
A high-yield synthesis of [Li{S(H)C(PPh2S)2}]2 [Li2·(3)2] was developed and this reagent was used in metathesis with ZnCl2 and NiCl2 to produce homoleptic complexes 4 and 5b in 85 and 93% yields, respectively. The solid-state structure of the octahedral complex [Zn{S(H)C(PPh2S)2}2] (4) reveals notable inequivalence between the Zn-S(C) and Zn-S(P) contacts (2.274(1) Å vs. 2.842(1) and 2.884(1) Å, respectively). Two structural isomers of the homoleptic complex [Ni{S(H)C(PPh2S)2}2] were isolated after prolonged crystallization processes. The octahedral green Ni(ii) isomer 5a exhibits the two monoprotonated ligands bonded in a tridentate (S,S',S'') mode to the Ni(ii) centre with three distinctly different Ni-S bond lengths (2.3487(8), 2.4500(9) and 2.5953(10) Å). By contrast, in the red-brown square-planar complex 5b the two ligands are S,S'-chelated to Ni(ii) (d(Ni-S) = 2.165(2) and 2.195(2) Å) with one pendant PPh2S group. DFT calculations revealed that the energetic difference between singlet and triplet state octahedral and square-planar isomers of the Ni(ii) complex is essentially indistinguishable. Consistently, VT and (31)P CP/MAS NMR spectroscopic investigations indicated that a mixture of isomers exists in solution at room temperature, while the singlet state square-planar isomer 5b becomes favoured at -40 °C.
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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
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".