Synthesis, Coordination Chemistry and Anion Binding by a Cyanophenyl‐Substituted 2‐Pyridinylurea
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The design and synthesis of urea‐based systems suitable for selective anion recognition has demonstrated potential for environmental remediation. These systems act as a double hydrogen‐bond donor to anion acceptors, however, the availability of the carbonyl group to also act as a hydrogen‐bond acceptor has posed as an optimization challenge. One approach to address this obstacle is to design preorganized coordination complexes that decrease the accessibility of the carbonyl group, yet are still capable of anionic hydrogen bonding by secondary coordination. Herein, a new 2‐pyridinylurea ligand, N ‐(3‐cyanophenyl)‐ N′ ‐pyridin‐2‐ylurea ( L1 ), and its transition metal complexes, [( L1 ) 2 Ni(CH 3 OH) 2 ](NO 3 ) 2 , [( L1 ) 2 Co(CH 3 OH) 2 ](NO 3 ) 2 , [( L1 ) 2 Ni(H 2 O) 2 ](NO 3 ) 2 and [( L1 ) 2 Cu(ClO 4 ) 2 ] n are reported. Subtle changes in metal‐to‐ligand ratio and solvent conditions yielded dramatically different anion‐binding motifs for two Ni 2+ complexes, while bis‐metal coordination of a perchlorate anion in the Cu 2+ complex resulted in hydrogen bonding with the weakest available ligand acceptor.
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 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 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".