Statistical Analysis of Copper(I) Iodide and Bis(Diphenylphosphino)alkane-Based Complexes and Coordination Polymers
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The prediction of the metal cluster within a coordination polymer or complex, as well as the dimensionality of the resulting polymer or complex (i.e., 0D, 1D, 2D, or 3D), is often challenging. This is the case for Ph2P(CH2)mPPh2 ligands (1 ≤ m ≤ 8) and CuX salts, particularly for X = I. This work endeavors a systematic statistical analysis combining studies in the literature and new data, mapping the nature of the resulting CuI aggregates with eight different diphoshphines in 2:1, 3:2, 1:1, 2:3, and 1:2 CuI:Ph2P(CH2)mPPh2 molar ratios as a function of m, which lead to either pure products or mixtures. Several trends are made relating stoichiometry and chain length to the CuI cluster formed (i.e., globular vs. quasi-planar). Four new X-ray structures were determined: [Cu3I2(L1)3]I, Cu3I3(L2)2, Cu2I2(L6)2, and Cu4I4(L8)2, where m is, respectively, 1, 2, 6, and 8, in which the CuxIy central aggregates adopt triangular bipyramid, diamond, rhomboid, and cubane shaped motifs, respectively. Photophysical measurements assisted the establishment of trends considering the paucity of the crystallographic structures. During this study, it was also found that the 0D-complex Cu2I2(Ph2P(CH2)5PPh2)2 exhibits thermally activated delayed fluorescence.
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 | 0.004 | 0.008 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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".