MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4399872968 · doi:10.1139/cjc-2024-0035

A relative stability scale of nitrogen donor ligand ruthenium complexes based on their stability constants calculated from first principles by DFT methods

2024· article· en· W4399872968 on OpenAlexafffundvenue
Kyle H. Salmon, Marcel Schlaf

Bibliographic record

VenueCanadian Journal of Chemistry · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicMetal complexes synthesis and properties
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Guelph
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada
KeywordsChemistryRutheniumStability (learning theory)NitrogenLigand (biochemistry)Computational chemistryScale (ratio)ThermodynamicsPhysical chemistryOrganic chemistryCatalysis

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Using DFT calculations (M06/def2-TZVP/SMD solvent model) a relative stability scale is established from first principles for a series of iron and ruthenium complexes with ligand frameworks based on chelating pyridine- and pyrrole-type (porphyrin and phthalocyanine) ligands by determining the equilibrium constants for the complex formation reactions [M(H 2 O) 6 ] 2+ + nL → [M(L) n (H 2 O) m ] 2+ + (6 − m) H 2 O; M=Fe, Ru in aqueous solution through Hess's law and the van't Hoff equation. For a subset of the iron complexes, comparison against the available experimental data systematically underestimates the calculated constants by multiple orders of magnitude for the high-spin hexaaqua complex as the starting material, but shows a linear correlation trend between the experimental and calculated values. A similar correlation exists between the calculated values for the iron and ruthenium complexes. For the latter, for which no experimental data are available, the values are very high. On the relative scale calculated, the stability constants for the macrocyclic porphyrin and phthalocyanine complexes are unexpectedly low when calculated from the neutral ligand, but very high when calculated for reactions starting from the deprotonated ligand in its dianionic state. The limitations of the model are discussed, in particular with regards to the likely very large influence of solvation energies and hydrogen-bond networks not explicitly formulated in the SMD solvent model employed and Brønsted acid–base reactions between complexes and ligands, and its merits critically evaluated.

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 categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: Bench or experimental
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.020
Threshold uncertainty score0.999

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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 head0.060
GPT teacher head0.278
Teacher spread0.218 · 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

Citations0
Published2024
Admission routes3
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCanadian Journal of ChemistrySame topicMetal complexes synthesis and propertiesFrench-language works237,207