MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4414370625 · doi:10.1021/acs.cgd.5c01115

Ladder-Type Cu(II) Coordination Polymer with π–π Stacking of Planar Blatter Radical Ligands: Structural and Magnetic Characterization

2025· article· en· W4414370625 on OpenAlexaff
Hemant Kumar Singh, Jeremy M. Rawson, Bruno Cury Camargo, Ethan S. Pollett, Oleksandr Hietsoi, Andrienne C. Friedli, Piotr Kaszyński

Bibliographic record

VenueCrystal Growth & Design · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMaterials Science
TopicMagnetism in coordination complexes
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Windsor
FundersDivision of ChemistryNarodowe Centrum NaukiNational Science Foundation
KeywordsParamagnetismStackingAntiferromagnetismElectron paramagnetic resonanceRadicalMagnetic susceptibilityLigand (biochemistry)DenticityDensity functional theory

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

High Resolution Image Download MS PowerPoint Slide The synthesis of two C(2)-pyridyl derivatives of the planar Blatter radical was developed by using the tris(trimethylsilyl)silane (TTMSS)-assisted cyclization of appropriate iodoarenes. These monodentate paramagnetic ligands were characterized by spectroscopic (UV–vis and electron paramagnetic resonance (EPR)) and electrochemical methods and reacted with (pdc)Cu(H 2 O) 3 . A complex containing the 3-pyridyl group was characterized structurally, revealing novel polymeric Cu–O–Cu–O ladders separated with slipped stacks of radical ligands. Superconducting quantum interference device (SQUID) magnetometry of this complex demonstrated strong antiferromagnetic interactions between the radicals and largely isolated Cu(II) ions. Analysis of the magnetic data with the Hatfield model, assuming two isolated one-dimensional (1D) alternating Heisenberg chains, gave J RR / k B = −1200 K and α RR = 0.4 for the paramagnetic ligand stacks, and J CuCu / k B = −3.5 K and α CuCu = 0.9 for the Cu(II) ion chains. Analysis of the experimental data was augmented with density functional theory (DFT) calculations.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
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 score0.086
Threshold uncertainty score0.694

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
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)0.0010.000

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 head0.012
GPT teacher head0.229
Teacher spread0.217 · 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.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
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

Citations3
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCrystal Growth & DesignSame topicMagnetism in coordination complexesFrench-language works237,207