MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4406450345 · doi:10.1002/chem.202404420

Phosphorus‐Nitrogen Heterocycles Derived from Chelating <i>N</i> ‐Donor Ligands: Historical Advances, Recent Highlights, and Outlook

2025· article· en· W4406450345 on OpenAlexafffund
Shrabani Khan, Joe B. Gilroy

Bibliographic record

VenueChemistry - A European Journal · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldChemistry
TopicSynthesis and Reactivity of Heterocycles
Canadian institutionsWestern University
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada
KeywordsPhosphorusChelationNitrogenChemistryEnvironmental chemistryOrganic chemistry

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The exploration of phosphorus-nitrogen heterocycles derived from chelating N-donor ligands is an area of research that has lagged behind the development of similar heterocycles based on other main group elements, most notably boron. The fact that phosphorus and nitrogen are both group 15 elements and that their compounds are most commonly viewed as Lewis bases likely contributes to this observation. However, through judicious ligand design and creative use of phosphorus sources that render phosphorus as Lewis acidic and/or electron poor, a variety of heterocyclic architectures are possible. In this article, we highlight selected examples of phosphorus adducts of bidentate, tridentate, and tetradentate N-donor ligands that have shown utility as functional molecular materials, in small molecule activation and catalysis, and as therapeutics and diagnostics in chemical biology. Finally, we look forward to the future of this emerging area and provide commentary on the unique opportunities available to researchers working within the field of phosphorus-nitrogen heterocycle chemistry.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.002
Threshold uncertainty score0.007

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.001

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.

Opus teacher head0.010
GPT teacher head0.209
Teacher spread0.199 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designTheoretical or conceptual
Domainnot available
GenreReview

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

Citations4
Published2025
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueChemistry - A European JournalSame topicSynthesis and Reactivity of HeterocyclesFrench-language works237,207