Ready Access to Anhydrous Anionic Lanthanide Acetates by Using Imidazolium Acetate Ionic Liquids as the Reaction Medium
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract Access to lanthanide acetate coordination compounds is challenged by the tendency of lanthanides to coordinate water and the plethora of acetate coordination modes. A straightforward, reproducible synthetic procedure by treating lanthanide chloride hydrates with defined ratios of the ionic liquid (IL) 1‐ethyl‐3‐methylimidazolium acetate ([C2mim][OAc]) has been developed. This reaction pathway leads to two isostructural crystalline anhydrous coordination complexes, the polymeric [C2mim]n[{Ln2(OAc)7}n] and the dimeric [C2mim]2[Ln2(OAc)8], based on the ion size and the ratio of IL used. A reaction with an IL : Ln‐salt ratio of 5 : 1, where Ln=Nd, Sm, and Gd, led exclusively to the polymer, whilst for the heaviest lanthanides (Dy−Lu) the dimer was observed. Reaction with Eu and Tb resulted in a mixture of both polymeric and dimeric forms. When the amount of IL and/or the size of the cation was increased, the reaction led to only the dimeric compound for all the lanthanide series. Crystallographic analyses of the resulting salts revealed three different types of metal‐acetate coordination modes where η2μκ2 is the most represented in both structure types.
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) | 0.001 | 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 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 0.002 |
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".