Tridentate NPN Ligands with a Central Secondary Phosphine Oxide Donor and their Corresponding Metal Complexes
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract Three new Ru complexes with N‐P(OH)‐N donor ligands were synthesized and characterized. A ruthenium complex with a ligand with quinolinyl side arms exhibited monodentate coordination through the phosphorus atom with an intramolecular POH⋅⋅⋅N(quinolinyl) hydrogen bond but with no interaction between nitrogen donors and the ruthenium center. Two pentamethylcyclopentadienyl ruthenium complexes with a ligand with pyridyl side arms exhibited fac‐κ3‐NPN’ tridentate coordination to the metal center, one with an interionic POH⋅⋅⋅FPF5 hydrogen bond in the crystal. A paramagnetic nickel [Ni3(N‐P(O)‐N)4] cluster was also characterized; the crystal structure shows three nickel centers in two different environments. The central nickel is coordinated to four deprotonated ligands, two are bidentate κ2‐NO, two are monodentate κ‐O and is connected to the other two nickel centers by two sets of bridging μ2‐O,P moieties. Non‐central nickel centers are each coordinated to one bidentate ligand κ2‐PN and one monodentate ligand κ‐P.
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) | 0.002 | 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".