• No results found

Azido­tri­phenyl­germane

N/A
N/A
Protected

Academic year: 2020

Share "Azido­tri­phenyl­germane"

Copied!
8
0
0

Loading.... (view fulltext now)

Full text

(1)

metal-organic papers

m1362

Ivor Wharfet al. [Ge(C6H5)3(N3)] DOI: 10.1107/S1600536804021221 Acta Cryst.(2004). E60, m1362±m1364 Acta Crystallographica Section E

Structure Reports Online

ISSN 1600-5368

Azidotriphenylgermane

Ivor Wharfa* and Francine BeÂlanger-GarieÂpyb

aDepartment of Chemistry, Otto Maass Chemistry Building, McGill University, 801 Sherbrooke St. West, Montreal, Quebec, Canada H3A 2K6, andbDeÂpartement de Chimie, Universite de MontreÂal, CP 6128, Succ. Centre-ville, MontreÂal, QueÂbec, Canada H3C 3J7

Correspondence e-mail: [email protected]

Key indicators Single-crystal X-ray study

T= 220 K

Mean(C±C) = 0.003 AÊ Disorder in main residue

Rfactor = 0.033

wRfactor = 0.101

Data-to-parameter ratio = 14.3

For details of how these key indicators were automatically derived from the article, see http://journals.iucr.org/e.

#2004 International Union of Crystallography Printed in Great Britain ± all rights reserved

The title compound, [Ge(C6H5)3(N3)], (I), is monomeric with

quasi-tetrahedral geometry around germanium. The azide group (ÐNÐNÐN) is disordered. One form hasd(NÐ

N) >d(NÐN), the other has d(NÐN) <d(NÐN). In

contrast, the mesityl analogue, (II), hasd(NÐN) >d(NÐ

N). As expected, on going from (I) to (II), angle (CÐGeÐ

C)ave increases while angle (CÐGeÐN)ave decreases.

However, in contrast to the silicon case, d(GeÐN) and d(GeÐC)averemain effectively unchanged on going from (I)

to (II).

Comment

A few years ago, we determined the structures of several pseudohalotrimesitylgermanes [(Mes)3GeX: Mes =

2,4,6-tri-methylphenyl;X= CN, NCS, NCO, N3and OH] (Hiharaet al.,

2000) with the aim of comparing the geometries of these molecules with those of related phenylgermanium systems. However, only the structures of Ph3GeNCO (Tarkhovaet al.,

1976) and Ph3GeOH (Fergusonet al., 1992) were available for

this purpose at the time and only recently has the structure of Ph3GeH (McGrady et al., 2002) become available for

comparison with that of (Mes)3GeH (Lambert et al., 1998).

Thus, to enable a further comparison of this type to be made, we now report the structure of Ph3GeN3, (I).

Compound (I) is monomeric (Fig. 1) and is isostructural with Ph3SiN3(Wharf & Belanger-GarieÂpy, 2004). The average

CÐGeÐC angle [113.4 (1)] is greater than the average CÐ

GeÐN angle [105.1 (1)] (Table 1), with averaged (GeÐC) =

1.936 (2) AÊ and d(GeÐN1) = 1.8968 (17) AÊ. A similar geometry has been found for Ph3GeNCO (Tarkhova et al.,

1976), although the data are less precise than those given here. For (Mes)3GeN3, (II), the corresponding data are 115.6 (4),

102.2 (4), 1.95 (1) AÊ and 1.895 (9) AÊ, respectively. Thus, while

on going from (I) to (II), changes in average angles around Ge follow the trends predicted by Andose & Mislow (1974), for Ph3CH(Mes)3CH, no change in average d(GeÐC) and

d(GeÐN1) is apparent. In contrast, when comparing Ph3SiN3

with (Mes)3SiN3(Zigleret al., 1989), we found both average

d(SiÐC) andd(SiÐN1) to increase when Ph is replaced by Mes. Presumably, the longer GeÐC and GeÐN1 bonds are able to accommodate the distalo-CH3 N1interactions in (II)

without lengthening. However, the proximal o-CH3 o-CH3

interactions increase the average CÐGeÐC angle on going

(2)

from (I) to (II) to the same extent as found for the two analogous silicon compounds.

The azide group in (I) is disordered (50/50); one component

has d(N1ÐN21) > d(N21ÐN31) with GeÐN1ÐN21 =

118.1 (9) and N1ÐN21ÐN31 = 171.2 (2), while the second

component hasd(N1ÐN22) <d(N22ÐN32), GeÐN1ÐN22 = 121.3 (1) and N1ÐN22ÐN32 = 171 (3). This situation is

exactly comparable to that found for Ph3SiN3 (Wharf &

Belanger-GarieÂpy, 2004) and the same structural interpret-ation will thus apply. This may also account for the largeUeq

values noted for atoms N31 and N32.

Experimental

The title compound was prepared by re¯uxing chlorotriphenyl-germane (12.9 mmol, 4.36 g) in dry tetrahydrofuran (300 ml) with dried sodium azide (0.14 mol, 9.4 g) for 4 d. Evaporation of the ®ltrate under reduced pressure gave crude (I), which was recrys-tallized from hexane [m.p. 380±381 K; literature 380±380.5 K (Reichle, 1964)]. Analysis calculated for C18H15GeN3: C 62.50, H

4.37%; found: C 62.22, H 4.30%. X-ray quality crystals were obtained by slow evaporation of a hexane solution of (I).

Crystal data

[Ge(C6H5)3(N3)]

Mr= 345.92 Monoclinic,P21=n

a= 9.7428 (2) AÊ

b= 17.0689 (3) AÊ

c= 10.3630 (2) AÊ = 110.449 (1)

V= 1614.76 (5) AÊ3

Z= 4

Dx= 1.423 Mg mÿ3 CuKradiation

Cell parameters from 11289 re¯ections

= 4.6±72.9

= 2.56 mmÿ1

T= 220 (2) K Block, colourless 0.500.200.15 mm

Data collection

Bruker AXS SMART 2K/Platform diffractometer

!scans

Absorption correction: multi-scan (SADABS; Sheldrick, 1996)

Tmin= 0.403,Tmax= 0.681 13062 measured re¯ections

3097 independent re¯ections 2939 re¯ections withI> 2(I)

Rint= 0.026 max= 73.0

h=ÿ12!11

k=ÿ20!20

l=ÿ12!12

Re®nement

Re®nement onF2

R[F2> 2(F2)] = 0.033

wR(F2) = 0.101

S= 1.05 3097 re¯ections 217 parameters

H-atom parameters constrained

w= 1/[2(F

o2) + (0.084P)2] whereP= (Fo2+ 2Fc2)/3 (/)max= 0.001

max= 0.29 e AÊÿ3

min=ÿ0.62 e AÊÿ3

Table 1

Selected geometric parameters (AÊ,).

GeÐN1 1.8968 (17)

GeÐC11 1.9317 (18)

GeÐC21 1.9370 (16)

GeÐC31 1.9378 (17)

N1ÐN22 1.14 (2)

N1ÐN21 1.24 (2)

N21ÐN31 1.10 (2)

N22ÐN32 1.20 (3)

N1ÐGeÐC11 101.69 (9) N1ÐGeÐC21 107.51 (7) C11ÐGeÐC21 113.31 (7) N1ÐGeÐC31 106.27 (7) C11ÐGeÐC31 114.02 (7)

C21ÐGeÐC31 112.91 (7) N22ÐN1ÐGe 121.3 (1) N21ÐN1ÐGe 118.1 (9) N31ÐN21ÐN1 171.20 (19) N1ÐN22ÐN32 171 (3)

C11ÐGeÐN1ÐN22 158.20 (16) C21ÐGeÐN1ÐN22 38.90 (16) C31ÐGeÐN1ÐN22 ÿ82.20 (16) C11ÐGeÐN1ÐN21 169.90 (12) C21ÐGeÐN1ÐN21 50.60 (12) C31ÐGeÐN1ÐN21 ÿ70.60 (12)

N1ÐGeÐC11ÐC12 18.08 (17) N1ÐGeÐC11ÐC16 ÿ160.86 (15) N1ÐGeÐC21ÐC22 37.05 (16) N1ÐGeÐC21ÐC26 ÿ147.37 (14) N1ÐGeÐC31ÐC32 75.48 (16) N1ÐGeÐC31ÐC36 ÿ101.80 (15)

The azide group is found to be disordered with two sets of N atoms. The occupancy factor was originally re®ned but was then ®xed at 0.5 for each atom set in the ®nal cycles. All the H atoms were positioned geometrically (CÐH = 0.94 AÊ) and were included in the re®nement in the riding-model approximation, with Uiso(H) = 1.2Ueq(parent

atom).

Data collection:SMART(Bruker, 1999); cell re®nement:SAINT

(Bruker, 1999); data reduction:SAINT; program(s) used to solve structure:SHELXS97 (Sheldrick, 1997); program(s) used to re®ne structure: SHELXL97 (Sheldrick, 1997); molecular graphics:

SHELXTL (Bruker, 1997); software used to prepare material for publication: UdMX (Maris, 2004).

Financial support from the Fonds FQRNT du MinisteÁre de l'EÂducation du QueÂbec is gratefully acknowledged.

References

Andose, J. D. & Mislow, K. (1974).J. Am. Chem. Soc.96, 2168±2176. Bruker (1997). SHELXTL. Version 5.10. Bruker AXS Inc., Madison,

Wisconsin, USA.

Bruker (1999).SMART(Version 5.059) andSAINT(Version 6.06). Bruker AXS Inc., Madison, Wisconsin, USA.

Ferguson, G., Gallagher, J. F., Murphy, D., Spalding, T. R., Glidewell, C. & Holden, H. D. (1992).Acta Cryst.C48, 1228±1231.

Hihara, G., Hynes, R. C., Lebuis, A.-M., RivieÁre-Baudet, M., Wharf, I. & Onyszchuk, M. (2000).J. Organomet. Chem.598, 276±285.

Lambert, J. B., Stern, C. L., Zhao, Y., Tse, W. C., Shawl, C. E., Lentz, K. T. & Kania, L. (1998).J. Organomet. Chem.568, 21±31.

Maris, T. (2004).UdMX. Version 6.2. University of Montreal, Quebec, Canada.

metal-organic papers

Acta Cryst.(2004). E60, m1362±m1364 Ivor Wharfet al. [Ge(C6H5)3(N3)]

m1363

Figure 1

(3)

McGrady, G. S., Odlyha, M., Prince, P. & Steed, J. W. (2002).CrystEngComm.

4, 271±276.

Reichle, W. T. (1964).Inorg. Chem.3, 402±406.

Sheldrick, G. M. (1996).SADABS.Bruker AXS Inc., Madison, Wisconsin, USA.

Sheldrick, G. M. (1997). SHELXS97 and SHELXL97. University of GoÈttingen, Germany.

Tarkhova, T. N., Nikdaeva, L. E., Chupninov, E. V., Simonov, M. A. & Belov, N. V. (1976).Sov. Phys. Crystallogr.21, 216±218.

Wharf, I. & Belanger-GarieÂpy, F. (2004). Acta Cryst. E60, o1643± o1645.

Zigler, S. S., Haller, K. J. & West, R. (1989). Organometallics, 8, 1656± 1660.

metal-organic papers

(4)

supporting information

sup-1 Acta Cryst. (2004). E60, m1362–m1364

supporting information

Acta Cryst. (2004). E60, m1362–m1364 [https://doi.org/10.1107/S1600536804021221]

Azidotriphenylgermane

Ivor Wharf and Francine B

é

langer-Gari

é

py

azidotriphenylgermane

Crystal data [Ge(C6H5)3(N3)] Mr = 345.92 Monoclinic, P21/n Hall symbol: -P 2yn a = 9.7428 (2) Å b = 17.0689 (3) Å c = 10.3630 (2) Å β = 110.449 (1)° V = 1614.76 (5) Å3 Z = 4

F(000) = 704 Dx = 1.423 Mg m−3

Cu radiation, λ = 1.54178 Å Cell parameters from 11289 reflections θ = 4.6–72.9°

µ = 2.56 mm−1 T = 220 K Block, colourless 0.50 × 0.20 × 0.15 mm

Data collection

Bruker AXS SMART 2K/Platform diffractometer

Radiation source: Sealed Tube Graphite monochromator

Detector resolution: 5.5 pixels mm-1 ω scans

Absorption correction: multi-scan (SADABS; Sheldrick, 1996) Tmin = 0.403, Tmax = 0.681

13062 measured reflections 3097 independent reflections 2939 reflections with I > 2σ(I) Rint = 0.026

θmax = 73.0°, θmin = 5.2° h = −12→11

k = −20→20 l = −12→12

Refinement Refinement on F2 Least-squares matrix: full R[F2 > 2σ(F2)] = 0.033 wR(F2) = 0.101 S = 1.05 3097 reflections 217 parameters 48 restraints

Primary atom site location: structure-invariant direct methods

Secondary atom site location: difference Fourier map

Hydrogen site location: inferred from neighbouring sites

H-atom parameters constrained w = 1/[σ2(F

o2) + (0.084P)2] where P = (Fo2 + 2Fc2)/3 (Δ/σ)max = 0.001

(5)

supporting information

sup-2 Acta Cryst. (2004). E60, m1362–m1364

Special details

Experimental. X-ray crystallographic data for (A) were collected from a single-crystal sample, which was mounted on a loop fiber. Data were collected using a Bruker Platform diffractometer, equipped with a Bruker SMART 2 K Charged-Coupled Device (CCD) Area Detector using the program SMART and normal focus sealed tube source graphite monochromated Cu—Kα radiation. The crystal-to-detector distance was 4.908 cm, and the data collection was carried out in 512 x 512 pixel mode, utilizing 4 x 4 pixel binning. The initial unit-cell parameters were determined by a least-squares fit of the angular setting of strong reflections, collected by a 9.0 degree scan in 30 frames over four different parts of the reciprocal space (120 frames total). One complete sphere of data was collected, to better than 0.8 Å resolution. Upon completion of the data collection, the first 101 frames were recollected in order to improve the decay correction analysis.

Geometry. All e.s.d.'s (except the e.s.d. in the dihedral angle between two l.s. planes) are estimated using the full covariance matrix. The cell e.s.d.'s are taken into account individually in the estimation of e.s.d.'s in distances, angles and torsion angles; correlations between e.s.d.'s in cell parameters are only used when they are defined by crystal symmetry. An approximate (isotropic) treatment of cell e.s.d.'s is used for estimating e.s.d.'s involving l.s. planes.

Refinement. Refinement of F2 against ALL reflections. The weighted R-factor wR and goodness of fit S are based on F2, conventional R-factors R are based on F, with F set to zero for negative F2. The threshold expression of F2 > σ(F2) is used only for calculating R-factors(gt) etc. and is not relevant to the choice of reflections for refinement. R-factors based on F2 are statistically about twice as large as those based on F, and R- factors based on ALL data will be even larger.

Fractional atomic coordinates and isotropic or equivalent isotropic displacement parameters (Å2)

x y z Uiso*/Ueq Occ. (<1)

Ge 0.601550 (19) 0.157792 (10) 0.247136 (18) 0.03403 (12) N1 0.5977 (2) 0.07986 (10) 0.11545 (17) 0.0478 (4)

N21 0.714 (2) 0.0634 (12) 0.099 (2) 0.050 (2) 0.50 N31 0.8132 (12) 0.0394 (6) 0.0859 (10) 0.080 (2) 0.50 N22 0.695 (3) 0.0702 (13) 0.081 (3) 0.070 (6) 0.50 N32 0.7848 (14) 0.0630 (7) 0.0263 (11) 0.100 (3) 0.50 C11 0.39515 (19) 0.17474 (11) 0.20953 (19) 0.0394 (4)

C12 0.2910 (2) 0.12018 (13) 0.1358 (2) 0.0505 (5)

H12 0.3207 0.0733 0.1058 0.061*

C13 0.1436 (3) 0.1353 (2) 0.1067 (3) 0.0709 (7)

H13 0.0735 0.0991 0.0544 0.085*

C14 0.0981 (3) 0.20283 (19) 0.1535 (3) 0.0734 (8)

H14 −0.0021 0.2118 0.1353 0.088*

C15 0.2001 (3) 0.25657 (17) 0.2266 (3) 0.0700 (7)

H15 0.1694 0.3028 0.2579 0.084*

C16 0.3488 (3) 0.24339 (13) 0.2549 (2) 0.0520 (5)

H16 0.4180 0.2807 0.3047 0.062*

C21 0.70042 (18) 0.24861 (9) 0.20908 (16) 0.0343 (3) C22 0.6816 (2) 0.27043 (11) 0.07444 (18) 0.0399 (4)

H22 0.6257 0.2386 0.0008 0.048*

C23 0.7443 (3) 0.33838 (10) 0.0478 (2) 0.0458 (4)

H23 0.7319 0.3523 −0.0433 0.055*

C24 0.8252 (2) 0.38585 (10) 0.1558 (2) 0.0456 (4)

H24 0.8664 0.4326 0.1378 0.055*

C25 0.8457 (2) 0.36478 (12) 0.2900 (2) 0.0473 (4)

H25 0.9016 0.3969 0.3632 0.057*

C26 0.7842 (2) 0.29643 (11) 0.31699 (18) 0.0424 (4)

(6)

supporting information

sup-3 Acta Cryst. (2004). E60, m1362–m1364

C31 0.7044 (2) 0.11211 (10) 0.42617 (17) 0.0368 (3) C32 0.8547 (2) 0.10394 (12) 0.4735 (2) 0.0478 (4)

H32 0.9083 0.1227 0.4201 0.057*

C33 0.9273 (2) 0.06822 (13) 0.5993 (2) 0.0562 (5)

H33 1.0298 0.0631 0.6312 0.067*

C34 0.8488 (3) 0.04029 (13) 0.6771 (2) 0.0561 (5)

H34 0.8979 0.0164 0.7625 0.067*

C35 0.6988 (2) 0.04728 (13) 0.6303 (2) 0.0533 (5)

H35 0.6454 0.0270 0.6828 0.064*

C36 0.6261 (2) 0.08424 (11) 0.50562 (19) 0.0440 (4)

H36 0.5238 0.0904 0.4751 0.053*

Atomic displacement parameters (Å2)

U11 U22 U33 U12 U13 U23

Ge 0.03553 (18) 0.03323 (17) 0.03152 (17) −0.00267 (5) 0.00942 (12) −0.00067 (5) N1 0.0491 (10) 0.0462 (8) 0.0462 (9) −0.0038 (7) 0.0142 (8) −0.0138 (7) N21 0.043 (4) 0.049 (3) 0.062 (5) −0.004 (3) 0.022 (4) −0.016 (3) N31 0.052 (3) 0.089 (5) 0.101 (6) −0.004 (3) 0.028 (4) −0.038 (4) N22 0.071 (9) 0.062 (7) 0.072 (7) −0.011 (5) 0.017 (6) −0.038 (6) N32 0.090 (7) 0.109 (8) 0.123 (8) −0.021 (5) 0.066 (7) −0.059 (6) C11 0.0372 (9) 0.0429 (8) 0.0357 (9) 0.0023 (7) 0.0098 (7) 0.0123 (7) C12 0.0428 (10) 0.0556 (11) 0.0466 (10) −0.0085 (8) 0.0076 (8) 0.0112 (8) C13 0.0439 (13) 0.0951 (19) 0.0633 (14) −0.0141 (12) 0.0057 (11) 0.0295 (14) C14 0.0445 (12) 0.0979 (19) 0.0799 (16) 0.0197 (12) 0.0242 (12) 0.0481 (15) C15 0.0674 (16) 0.0741 (15) 0.0806 (16) 0.0298 (12) 0.0412 (14) 0.0367 (13) C16 0.0532 (11) 0.0484 (10) 0.0576 (11) 0.0088 (8) 0.0233 (9) 0.0117 (9) C21 0.0340 (8) 0.0347 (8) 0.0336 (7) −0.0007 (6) 0.0111 (7) −0.0014 (6) C22 0.0418 (9) 0.0429 (9) 0.0340 (8) −0.0020 (7) 0.0119 (7) −0.0022 (7) C23 0.0508 (12) 0.0456 (11) 0.0445 (10) 0.0023 (7) 0.0210 (9) 0.0068 (6) C24 0.0445 (10) 0.0364 (8) 0.0595 (11) −0.0028 (6) 0.0228 (9) 0.0031 (7) C25 0.0453 (10) 0.0417 (9) 0.0486 (10) −0.0067 (8) 0.0084 (8) −0.0079 (8) C26 0.0493 (10) 0.0402 (8) 0.0344 (8) −0.0033 (7) 0.0103 (7) −0.0012 (6) C31 0.0391 (9) 0.0331 (8) 0.0345 (8) 0.0004 (6) 0.0084 (7) 0.0004 (6) C32 0.0401 (10) 0.0524 (10) 0.0486 (10) −0.0015 (7) 0.0125 (8) 0.0076 (8) C33 0.0407 (11) 0.0584 (12) 0.0596 (12) 0.0030 (8) 0.0049 (9) 0.0121 (9) C34 0.0583 (13) 0.0522 (11) 0.0461 (10) 0.0009 (9) 0.0037 (9) 0.0152 (9) C35 0.0581 (12) 0.0570 (11) 0.0454 (10) −0.0018 (9) 0.0188 (9) 0.0122 (8) C36 0.0418 (10) 0.0467 (9) 0.0427 (9) −0.0002 (7) 0.0139 (8) 0.0032 (7)

Geometric parameters (Å, º)

Ge—N1 1.8968 (17) C22—C23 1.383 (3)

Ge—C11 1.9317 (18) C22—H22 0.94

Ge—C21 1.9370 (16) C23—C24 1.383 (3)

Ge—C31 1.9378 (17) C23—H23 0.94

N1—N22 1.14 (2) C24—C25 1.382 (3)

(7)

supporting information

sup-4 Acta Cryst. (2004). E60, m1362–m1364

N21—N31 1.10 (2) C25—C26 1.384 (3)

N22—N32 1.20 (3) C25—H25 0.94

C11—C12 1.392 (3) C26—H26 0.94

C11—C16 1.395 (3) C31—C32 1.379 (3)

C12—C13 1.385 (3) C31—C36 1.388 (3)

C12—H12 0.94 C32—C33 1.388 (3)

C13—C14 1.382 (5) C32—H32 0.94

C13—H13 0.94 C33—C34 1.376 (3)

C14—C15 1.370 (4) C33—H33 0.94

C14—H14 0.94 C34—C35 1.375 (3)

C15—C16 1.392 (3) C34—H34 0.94

C15—H15 0.94 C35—C36 1.389 (3)

C16—H16 0.94 C35—H35 0.94

C21—C22 1.393 (2) C36—H36 0.94

C21—C26 1.395 (2)

N1—Ge—C11 101.69 (9) C23—C22—H22 119.6

N1—Ge—C21 107.51 (7) C21—C22—H22 119.6

C11—Ge—C21 113.31 (7) C22—C23—C24 119.79 (19)

N1—Ge—C31 106.27 (7) C22—C23—H23 120.1

C11—Ge—C31 114.02 (7) C24—C23—H23 120.1

C21—Ge—C31 112.91 (7) C25—C24—C23 120.18 (17)

N22—N1—Ge 121.3 (1) C25—C24—H24 119.9

N21—N1—Ge 118.1 (9) C23—C24—H24 119.9

N31—N21—N1 171.20 (19) C24—C25—C26 120.13 (17)

N1—N22—N32 171 (3) C24—C25—H25 119.9

C12—C11—C16 119.15 (19) C26—C25—H25 119.9 C12—C11—Ge 121.20 (16) C25—C26—C21 120.32 (17)

C16—C11—Ge 119.64 (15) C25—C26—H26 119.8

C13—C12—C11 119.7 (2) C21—C26—H26 119.8

C13—C12—H12 120.1 C32—C31—C36 119.35 (16)

C11—C12—H12 120.1 C32—C31—Ge 120.72 (14)

C14—C13—C12 121.0 (3) C36—C31—Ge 119.88 (14)

C14—C13—H13 119.5 C31—C32—C33 120.51 (18)

C12—C13—H13 119.5 C31—C32—H32 119.7

C15—C14—C13 119.5 (2) C33—C32—H32 119.7

C15—C14—H14 120.2 C34—C33—C32 119.8 (2)

C13—C14—H14 120.2 C34—C33—H33 120.1

C14—C15—C16 120.6 (3) C32—C33—H33 120.1

C14—C15—H15 119.7 C35—C34—C33 120.21 (18)

C16—C15—H15 119.7 C35—C34—H34 119.9

C15—C16—C11 120.0 (2) C33—C34—H34 119.9

C15—C16—H16 120 C34—C35—C36 120.09 (19)

C11—C16—H16 120 C34—C35—H35 120

C22—C21—C26 118.82 (16) C36—C35—H35 120

C22—C21—Ge 121.14 (12) C31—C36—C35 119.99 (18)

C26—C21—Ge 119.89 (13) C31—C36—H36 120

(8)

supporting information

sup-5 Acta Cryst. (2004). E60, m1362–m1364

References

Related documents

In aggregate topic classifier, representative topic vectors for positive and negative classes are composed and used as a guide to classify the reports in the test dataset..

  However,  it  needs  to  be  highlighted  that  this  research  doesn’t  examine  the  causality  between   income  and  an  individual’s  risk  profile  or

The annotation in this work was on top of a small corpus of Arabic Wikipedia articles that had al- ready been annotated for named entities (Mohit et al., 2012).. Here we use

Since there are ex- actly the same number of features in the baseline and mixture model, the better performance is due to two facts: separate training of the feature weights λ

“The Japan Municipal Bond Yield Curve: 2002 to the Present.” International Journal of Economics and Finance, 8 (2016, forthcoming). “Comparative Analysis of Zero Coupon

The output of the word alignment systems (GIZA++ or ITG) were fed to a standard phrase extraction procedure that extracted all phrases of length up to 7 and esti- mated the

In addition, all knowledge sources we used in the core perceptron and the outside-layer linear model come from the training corpus, whereas many open knowl- edge sources (lexicon

Moreover, our second stage results point to the crucial role when explaining redistributive efficiency differences across countries of factors reflecting on the capacity