Syntheses and structures of a nitrogen-rich pyrimidine triazole ligand and its Cu <sup>I</sup> and Ag <sup>I</sup> complexes
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The product of an azide–alkyne Huisgen cycloaddition between a pyridine azide and a simple alkyne was crystallized alongside the products of the corresponding complexation reactions with copper(I) iodide and silver(I) nitrate. 4,6-Dimethyl-2-(4-propyl-1 H -1,2,3-triazol-1-yl)pyrimidine, C 11 H 15 N 5 , crystallizes with three molecules in the asymmetric unit. The extended structure involves aromatic π-stacking and an extensive network of C—H...N hydrogen bonds. The copper complex, di-μ-iodido-bis{[4,6-dimethyl-2-(4-propyl-1 H -1,2,3-triazol-1-yl-κ N 2 )pyrimidine-κ N 1 ]copper(I)}, [Cu 2 I 2 (C 11 H 15 N 5 ) 2 ], is dimeric with a pair of bridging iodide ions and N , N -chelating ligands, whereas the silver complex, bis[4,6-dimethyl-2-(4-propyl-1 H -1,2,3-triazol-1-yl-κ N 2 )pyrimidine-κ N 1 ](nitrato-κ O )silver(I), [Ag(NO 3 )(C 11 H 15 N 5 ) 2 ], sees the silver(I) ion suspended between two ligands and weakly attached to a nitrate counter-ion. The copper coordination polyhedra are distorted CuN 2 I 2 tetrahedra whereas the silver ion adopts an irregular AgN 4 O coordination polyhedron. The goal of this work is to develop the synthesis of this ligand for the use with natural products as starting materials. The results presented here represent the potential crystallinity of the ligand system and the complexes yielding from it.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 teacher head, 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".