To Loop or Not to Loop: Influence of Hinge Flexibility on Self‐Assembly Outcomes for Acridine‐Based Triazolylpyridine Chelates with Zinc(II), Iron(II), and Copper(II)
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract Coordination‐driven self‐assembly has been established as an effective strategy for the efficient construction of intricate architectures in both natural and artificial systems, for applications ranging from gene regulation to metal–organic frameworks. Central to these systems is the need for carefully designed organic ligands, generally with rigid components, that can undergo self‐assembly with metal ions in a predictable manner. Herein, we report the synthesis and study of three novel organic ligands that feature 3,6‐disubstituted acridine as a rigid spacer connected to two 2‐(1,2,3‐triazol‐4‐yl)pyridine “click” chelates through hinges of the same length but differing flexibility. The flexibility of these “three‐atom” hinges was modulated by i) moving from secondary to tertiary amide functional groups and ii) replacing an sp 2 amide carbon with an sp 3 methylene carbon. In an effort to understand the role of hinge flexibility in directing self‐assembly into mononuclear loops or dinuclear cylinders, the impact of these changes on self‐assembly outcomes with zinc(II), iron(II), and copper(II) ions is described.
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 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 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) | 0.000 | 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".