Nickel as a Lewis Base in a T‐Shaped Nickel(0) Germylene Complex Incorporating a Flexible Bis(NHC) Ligand
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract Flexible, chelating bis(NHC) ligand 2, able to accommodate both cis‐ and trans‐coordination modes, was used to synthesize (2)Ni(η2‐cod), 3. In reaction with GeCl2, it produced (2)NiGeCl2, 4, featuring a T‐shaped Ni0 and a pyramidal Ge center. Complex 4 could also be prepared from [(2)GeCl]Cl, 5, and Ni(cod)2, in a reaction that formally involved Ni–Ge transmetalation, followed by coordination of the extruded GeCl2 moiety to Ni. A computational analysis showed that 4 possesses considerable multiconfigurational character and the Ni→Ge bond is formed through σ‐donation from the Ni 4s, 4p, and 3d orbitals to Ge. (NHC)2Ni(cod) complexes 9 and 10, as well as (NHC)2GeCl2 derivative 11, incorporating ligands that cannot accommodate a wide bite angle, failed to produce isolable Ni–Ge complexes. The isolation of (2)Ni(η2‐Py), 12, provides further evidence for the reluctance of the (2)Ni0 fragment to act as a σ‐Lewis acid.
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 | 0.001 |
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".