Crystal engineering of radical–radical cocrystals
Bibliographic record
Abstract
In 1928 Heisenberg proposed that bulk (ferro)magnetic order would only ever be achieved in systems containing heavy atoms (i.e.metals, their oxides, nitrides etc) [1].Indeed, the first observation of bulk ferromagnetism in an organic radical was not observed until 1991, albeit at 0.6 K [2].Since then approaches to develop new organic magnets with higher ordering temperatures have been explored.In 1993 Peter Day suggested that magnetic ordering in organic materials would not occur above room temperature [3] and, while ordering temperatures up to 70 K have been achieved [4], radical magnetism at room temperature continues to be elusive.Our research has recently focussed on the cocrystallization of radicals to afford radical-radical cocrystals as potential routes to organic ferrimagnets [5,6].The current study explores the cocrystallization of dithiadiazolyl (DTDA, E = S, Fig. 1) and diselenadiazolyl (DSDA, E = Se, Fig 1) radicals with TEMPONE [6].This presentation reports recent experimental and computational studies on the relative energetics of DTDAO-N< vs DTDAO=C< interactions, reflected in competing regions of O d-for TEMPONE (Fig. 1(inset)) [7].Figure 1.Reaction of the DTDA and DSDA radicals with TEMPONE afford the 2:1 cocrystals [DTDA]2[TEMPONE] and [DSDA]2[TEMPONE]; inset: molecular electrostatic potential for TEMPONE.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| 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 | 0.001 |
| 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 teacher head, 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".