MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3026364485 · doi:10.1021/acs.inorgchem.0c01105

Synthesis and Characterization of SF<sub>4</sub> Adducts with Polycyclic Amines

2020· article· en· W3026364485 on OpenAlexafffund
Nathan Kostiuk, James T. Goettel, Michael Gerken

Bibliographic record

VenueInorganic Chemistry · 2020
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldChemistry
TopicInorganic Fluorides and Related Compounds
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Lethbridge
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of CanadaGovernment of Canada
KeywordsChemistryChalcogenSolvolysisMoleculeNuclear magnetic resonance spectroscopyStereochemistryMoietyCrystallographyMedicinal chemistryOrganic chemistry

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Chalcogen-bonding interactions of SF4 with the polycyclic amines DABCO (C6H12N2) and HMTA (C6H12N4) were studied by low-temperature Raman spectroscopy and X-ray crystallography, revealing the 2:1 adducts C6H12N2·2SF4 and C6H12N4·2SF4 obtained from SF4 solvent. In C6H12N2·2SF4, the sulfur in each SF4 molecule is pentacoordinate with each SF4 coordinated by a single amine group, whereas C6H12N4·2SF4 forms a one-dimensional coordination polymer with three of the four nitrogen atoms in HMTA exhibiting N---S chalcogen bonds: one terminal N---SF4 and one experimentally unprecedented bridging N---(SF4)---N moiety. Solvolysis of C6H12N2·2SF4 by HF yielded crystals of [C6H12N2H]+2F–[SF5]−·6SF4, in which SF4 acts as a chalcogen-bond donor toward N as well as F. Solvolysis of C6H12N4·2SF4 resulted in the formation of the monoprotonated HMTA salt [C6H12N4H]+[HF2]−·SF4. Excess HF also led to isolation of monoprotonated HTMA, as seen in the crystal structure of the [C6H12N4H]+[H2F3]−·HF salt. The reaction of bicyclic, monobasic quinuclidine with SF4 and HF gave [C7H13NH]+F–·3.5SF4, which contains N–H---F–---SF4 interactions, as well as an interstitial, disordered SF4 molecule.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: Bench or experimental
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.002
Threshold uncertainty score0.943

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.006
GPT teacher head0.169
Teacher spread0.163 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designBench or experimental
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations16
Published2020
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueInorganic ChemistrySame topicInorganic Fluorides and Related CompoundsFrench-language works237,207