“…As imilarly poor regression was obtained when the sum of the covalent radii for NiÀCl (2.26 )a nd PdÀCl (2.41 )w ere used instead of ionic radii ( Figure S5). [15] Unlike PK -edge studies of M À Pb onds,w hich are more commonly used to assess electronic structure as it relates to MO energies and oxidation state, [17] there is asignificant trove of reported Cl K-edge XAS data with resolved and quantified M À Cl pre-edge peak areas.T his begs the question as to how our Cl K-edge XAS data compares and if XAS data reported previously correlates to M À Cl bond distance.T ob etter facilitate comparisons across data sets,w ec onverted our integrated Cl K-edge pre-edge peak areas into %Cl 3p character per MÀCl bond using the D 2d -CuCl 4 2À intensity standard described by Solomon et al [8b] Thed ata were then plotted against relative bond distances to account for differences in metal radii in complexes such as MCl 4 nÀ (where M = Fe 2+ ,F e 3+ ,C o 2+ ,N i 2+ ,C u 2+ ,P d 2+ ), [8a, 18] MCl 6 2À (where M = Ti 4+ and Pd 4+ ), [10a,18c] group IV cyclopentadienyl complexes, [19] Ti 4+ diphosphine complexes, [20] and others (see Supporting Information for details). Perhaps not surprising given the inherent uncertainties when using ionic radii that are highly dependent on both oxidation state and coordination number, no correlation between %Cl 3p character and relative M À Cl bond distance was observed ( Figure S6).…”