Impressive 1D (Ferrocenyl⋯C6F5R⋯)n Stacking Due to Cooperative Interactions in N-(Ferrocenylmethyl)Pentafluorobenzenecarboxamide: Four Crystal Structures and Contacts Analyses in N-(Ferrocenylalkyl)Benzenecarboxamides
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The crystal structures, interactions, and contacts analyses of four N-(ferrocenylalkyl)benzene-carboxamide derivatives are described as the N-(ferrocenylmethyl)benzenecarboxamide 4a, N-(ferrocenylmethyl)-2,6-difluorobenzenecarboxamide 4e, N-(ferrocenylmethyl)pentafluorobenzenecarboxamide 4f and N-(ferrocenylethyl)-4-fluorobenzenecarboxamide 5. Intermolecular amide⋯amide hydrogen-bonding interactions as 1D intermolecular chains are present in all four crystal structures, with N⋯O distances ranging from 2.819 (2) to 2.924 (3) Å. Three of the crystal structures have one molecule per asymmetric unit, except the phenyl 4a, which has Z’=2. In the structure of 4a, Fc(C-H)⋯(phenyl) and phenylC-H⋯π(C5H4) ring interactions dominate the interaction landscape, together with (1:1) face-to-face (phenyl)⋯(phenyl) and (C5H5)⋯(C5H5) ring stacked pairs (Fc = ferrocenyl moiety). In 4e, interlocking ferrocenyls, short C-H⋯(C-F) and C-H⋯O hydrogen bonds are the only additional notable intermolecular interactions. In the pentafluorophenyl derivative 4f, a remarkable selection of interactions is present with interwoven 1D ferrocenyl⋯(C6F5) stacking and C-H⋯F interactions; molecules aggregate forming impressive 1D columns comprising intertwined (Fc⋯C6F5⋯)n ring stacking. In the ethyl bridged system 5, C-H⋯F and C-H⋯π (arene) contacts with (4-fluorobenzene) ring⋯ring pairs combine and stack about inversion centres. The reported para-F substituted structure REYWOU (4d) is used for comparisons with the 4a, 4e, 4f, and 5 crystal structures. In view of the rich interaction chemistry, contacts enrichment analyses of the Hirshfeld surface highlights several interesting features in all five ferrocenylalkylcarboxamide structures.
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 | 0.000 | 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".