MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W390614056 · doi:10.1107/s2056989015006593

Crystal structure of tetrabutylammonium bromide–1,2-diiodo-3,4,5,6-tetrafluorobenzene–dichloromethane (2/2/1)

2015· article· en· W390614056 on OpenAlexaff
Jasmine Viger‐Gravel, Ilia Korobkov, David L. Bryce

Bibliographic record

VenueActa Crystallographica Section E Crystallographic Communications · 2015
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldChemistry
TopicCrystallography and molecular interactions
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Ottawa
Fundersnot available
KeywordsChemistryHalogen bondBromideHalogenHydrogen bondAcceptorCovalent bondCrystallographyDichloromethaneCocrystalCrystal structureSolventMedicinal chemistryInorganic chemistryMoleculeOrganic chemistryAlkyl

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The crystallization of a 1:1 molar solution of 1,2-di-iodo-3,4,5,6-tetra-fluoro-benzene (o-DITFB) and tetra-butyl-ammonium bromide (n-Bu4NBr) from di-chloro-methane yielded pure white crystals of a halogen-bonded compound, C16H36N(+)·Br(-)·C6F4I2·0.5CH2Cl2 or [(n-Bu4NBr)(o-DITFB)]·0.5CH2Cl2. The compound may be described as a quaternary system and may be classified as a salt-cocrystal solvate. The asymmetric unit contains one mol-ecule of solvent, two o-DITFB mol-ecules, two cations (n-Bu4N(+)) and two crystallographically distinct bromide ions [θI ⋯ Br- ⋯ I = 144.18 (1) and 135.35 (1)°]. The bromide ion is a bidentate halogen-bond acceptor which inter-acts with two covalently bonded iodines (i.e. halogen-bond donors), resulting in a one-dimensional polymeric zigzag chain network approximately along the a axis. The observed short contacts and angles are characteristic of the non-covalent inter-action [d C-I⋯Br = 3.1593 (4)-3.2590 (5) Å; θC-I⋯Br = 174.89 (7) and 178.16 (7)°]. It is noted that iodine acts as both a halogen-bond donor and a weak CH hydrogen-bond acceptor, while the bromide ions act as acceptors for weak CH hydrogen bonds and halogen bonds.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow), Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.966
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0030.005
Science and technology studies0.0010.002
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0030.001
Research integrity0.0010.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.024
GPT teacher head0.263
Teacher spread0.239 · 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.

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

Citations2
Published2015
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueActa Crystallographica Section E Crystallographic CommunicationsSame topicCrystallography and molecular interactionsFrench-language works237,207