MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4414529462 · doi:10.1002/chem.202502342

κ <sup>2</sup> <i>‐N</i> , <i>N</i> ′‐Sulfurdiimide and κ <sup>1</sup> ‐ <i>O</i> ‐Sulfinylamine Complexes of Tin(IV) Chloride

2025· article· en· W4414529462 on OpenAlexaff
Nathan D. D. Hill, Renè T. Boeré

Bibliographic record

VenueChemistry - A European Journal · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldChemistry
TopicOrganometallic Compounds Synthesis and Characterization
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Lethbridge
Fundersnot available
KeywordsAcetonitrileDenticityLigand (biochemistry)ElectrochemistryChlorideCharacterization (materials science)Molecule

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract A series of Sn(IV) chloride complexes with sulfur diimide (SDI, R‐NSN‐R) ligands are presented, including structural characterization of first‐in‐class complexes of bidentate diaryl‐SDIs, [SnCl 4 {κ 2 ‐ N , N ′‐S(NAr) 2 }] (Ar = 4‐X‐C 6 H 4 ‐), and an oxygen‐coordinated sulfinylamine, [SnCl 4 {κ 1 ‐ O ‐OSNPh} 2 ]. As part of the comprehensive experimental and DFT computational investigation, 119 Sn NMR analysis revealed a dynamic exchange equilibrium in acetonitrile between SDI ligands and solvent, providing insight into their complicated solution‐state chemical and electrochemical behavior. Voltammetric experiments show that, despite this dynamic equilibrium, the SDI ligands appear to suppress typical Sn(IV) reduction pathways. While tentative due to the complex behavior, this suggests that SDIs are functioning as redox‐active (RA) ligands. In conjunction with our previous systematic characterization of diaryl‐SDIs, these findings highlight their potential as an easily derivatized and highly redox‐tunable category of RA ligand and emphatically warrant further investigation.

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)0.000
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: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: Bench or experimental
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.002
Threshold uncertainty score0.006

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

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)0.0020.000

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 head0.009
GPT teacher head0.205
Teacher spread0.196 · 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 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

Citations1
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueChemistry - A European JournalSame topicOrganometallic Compounds Synthesis and CharacterizationFrench-language works237,207