MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4411909377 · doi:10.1002/chem.202501542

Strong Magnetic Coupling and Single‐Molecule Magnet Behavior in Tetrazinyl Radical‐Bridged Metallocenes

2025· article· en· W4411909377 on OpenAlexafffund
Neha Bajaj, Niki Mavragani, Alexandros A. Kitos, Rezeda Gayfullina, Jani O. Moilanen, Muralee Murugesu

Bibliographic record

VenueChemistry - A European Journal · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMaterials Science
TopicMagnetism in coordination complexes
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Ottawa
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of CanadaOulun YliopistoJyväskylän YliopistoStavros Niarchos FoundationChina Scholarship CouncilCanada Foundation for InnovationUniversity of Ottawa
KeywordsLanthanideChemistryMagnetParamagnetismMoleculeSolventCrystallographyUnpaired electronSingle-molecule magnetMetalloceneInductive couplingLigand (biochemistry)MagnetizationIonMagnetic fieldCondensed matter physicsPolymerizationOrganic chemistry

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Exchange coupling is essential in defining the magnetic behavior of polymetallic lanthanide‐based (Ln III ) single‐molecule magnets (SMMs), where, thanks to the unpaired electron(s), radical ligands show promise as magnetic bridges between the paramagnetic metal centers. Combining high‐performance lanthanide metallocene [Cp*₂Ln] + (Cp* = pentamethylcyclopentadienyl) units with the 3,6‐bis(2‐pyrimidyl)‐1,2,4,5‐tetrazine radical ligand (bmtz •− ) yielded two new radical‐bridged dinuclear lanthanide metallocenes, [(Cp*₂Ln)₂(bmtz •− )](BPh 4 )·Solvent (Ln = Gd ( 1 ), Solvent = THF; Dy ( 2 ), Solvent = toluene). The strong magnetic exchange coupling of J Gd–rad = ‐12.6 cm −1 observed in 1 , was probed via SQUID magnetometry as well as computational studies. This, combined with the highly anisotropic Dy III ions in 2 , leads to zero‐field SMM behavior and slow magnetic relaxation through thermally activated processes.

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)0.000
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 score0.096
Threshold uncertainty score0.998

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
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)0.0030.000

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 head0.017
GPT teacher head0.245
Teacher spread0.228 · 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

Citations4
Published2025
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueChemistry - A European JournalSame topicMagnetism in coordination complexesFrench-language works237,207