Chromium(VI) Oxyfluoride Dianions, [Cr<sub>2</sub>O<sub>4</sub>F<sub>6</sub>]<sup>2−</sup> and [CrO<sub>2</sub>F<sub>4</sub>]<sup>2−</sup>; Syntheses and Structures of [XeF<sub>5</sub>]<sub>2</sub>[Cr<sub>2</sub>O<sub>4</sub>F<sub>6</sub>], [XeF<sub>5</sub>]<sub>2</sub>[Cr<sub>2</sub>O<sub>4</sub>F<sub>6</sub>] ⋅ <i>n</i>X (X=HF, <i>n</i>=4; X=XeOF<sub>4</sub>, <i>n</i>=2), and [XeF<sub>5</sub>][Xe<sub>2</sub>F<sub>11</sub>][CrO<sub>2</sub>F<sub>4</sub>]
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract The fluorobasic character of the strong oxidative fluorinator, XeF6, and the oxidative resistance of the [XeF5]+ and [Xe2F11]+ cations have been exploited for the syntheses of several novel Cr(VI) dianion salts. The reactions of XeF6 and CrO2F2 in anhydrous HF and by direct fusion of the reactants in melts have yielded the first dinuclear Cr(VI) oxyfluoro‐dianion salts, [XeF5]2[Cr2O4F6], [XeF5]2[Cr2O4F6] ⋅ 4HF, [XeF5]2[Cr2O4F6] ⋅ 2XeOF4, and mononuclear Cr(VI) oxyfluoro‐dianion salt, [XeF5][Xe2F11][CrO2F4]. The salts were structurally characterized by low‐temperature (LT) single‐crystal X‐ray diffraction (SCXRD) and LT Raman spectroscopy. The [CrO2F4]2− and [Cr2O4F6]2− dianions have distorted octahedral cis‐dioxo Cr(VI) coordination spheres in which two F‐atoms are trans to one another and two F‐atoms are trans to O‐atoms, where the [Cr2O4F6]2− dianion is the fluorine‐bridged dimer of the [CrO2F3]− anion. Quantum‐chemical calculations were used to obtain the energy‐minimized, gas‐phase geometries, and the calculated vibrational spectra of the gas‐phase dianions and their ion‐pairs, which were used to aid in the vibrational frequency assignments of the crystalline salts. NBO and MEPS analyses and SCXRD show these salts are comprised of intimate ion‐pairs in which their cations and anions interact through primarily electrostatic Xe‐ ‐ ‐F σ‐hole 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 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 | 0.000 | 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".