Heteroleptic ruthenium bis-terpyridine complexes bearing a 4-(dimethylamino)phenyl donor and free coordination sites for hydrogen photo-evolution
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Motivated by the recent report of a heteroleptic ruthenium bis-terpyridine complex [Ru(toltpy)(bipytpy)](PF6)2 (toltpy: 4'-(tolyl)-2,2':6',2''-terpyridine; bipytpy: 4'-(4-bromophenyl)-4,4''':4'',4''''-di-pyridinyl-2,2':6',2''-terpyridine) capable of driving the photo-evolution of hydrogen with a constant rate of activity for 12 days [M. Rupp et al., Inorg. Chem., 2019, 58, 9127-9134], we investigated the impact of an internal electron donor on the photoactivity of three new ruthenium bis-terpyridine photosensitizers. We used 4'-(N,N-dimethylaminophenyl)-4,4''-di-tert-butyl-2,2':6',2''-terpyridine (Dtpy) as the donor ligand. These complexes also bear peripheral coordination sites at various positions on the terpyridine backbone, allowing for photosensitizer-catalyst interactions. Their performances in photocatalysis under blue and green light (450 and 525 nm, respectively) were measured, in the presence of triethanolamine, using a cobaloxime catalyst [Co(dmgH)2(H2O)2](BF4)2. Complexes C1[Ru(Dtpy)(pytpy)](PF6)2 (pytpy: 4'-(pyridin-4-yl)-2,2':6',2''-terpyridine) and C3[Ru(Dtpy)(bipytpy)](PF6)2 appeared to have a photostability similar to that of [Ru(toltpy)(bipytpy)](PF6)2 but with lower activity rates, while C2[Ru(Dtpy)(pz2bpy)](PF6)2 (pz2bpy: 2,6-di(pyrazin-2-yl)-4,4'-bipyridine) showed a better peak activity, however, followed by a progressive decay. After 24 hours, complexes C1, C2 and C3 had reached TONs of 18, 35 and 52 under blue light and 14, 20 and 47 under green light, respectively, and were still found to be active. Their photophysical and electronic properties are discussed to rationalize the photocatalytic trends.
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".