Synthesis of a Palladium Dimer Supported by a C-Bound Trifluoroacetonate Bridge Formed by Cleavage of a Hexafluoroacetylacetonate Ligand
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Palladium(II) hexafluoroacetylacetonate (Pd(Hfacac) 2 ) is known to form adducts of bases, such as lutidine (2,6-dimethylpyridine). When treated with approximately 3 equiv of lutidine, Pd(Hfacac) 2 yields a 1:1 complex as reported in the literature, Pd( O, O -Hfacac)( C -Hfacac)(lutidine), 1 . However, when the amount of excess lutidine is increased, a new complex, 2, is formed. A single-crystal X-ray structure of 2 proves it is a rare example of a dimeric palladium complex containing two Pd(Hfacac)(lutidine) fragments bridged by a dianionic trifluoroacetonate ligand, μ-CHC(O)CF 3 . The formation of 2 is accompanied by a white precipitate determined to be a mixture of trans -Pd(O 2 CCF 3 ) 2 (lutidine) 2 ( 3 ), confirming the fate of the missing trifluoroacetate fragment from the cleavage of the Hfacac ligand, and [lutidinium][Hfacac] ( 4 ). Subsequent experiments revealed the determinative role that water played in this reaction. The mechanism of cleavage of the Hfacac ligand was explored by DFT methods.
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 | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
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".