Ligand-centred reactivity of bis(picolyl)amine iridium: sequential deprotonation, oxidation and oxygenation of a "non-innocent" ligand

Treatment of [Ir(bpa)(cod)](+) complex [1](+) with a strong base (e.g., tBuO(-)) led to unexpected double deprotonation to form the anionic [Ir-(bpa-2H)(cod)](-) species [3](-), via the mono-deprotonated neutral amido complex [Ir(bpa-H)(cod)] as an isolable intermediate. A certain degree of aromaticity of the obtained metal-chelate ring may explain the favourable double deprotonation. The rhodium analogue [4](-) was prepared in situ. The new species [M(bpa-2H)(cod)](-) (M = Rh, Ir) are best described as two-electron reduced analogues of the cationic imine complexes [M-I(cod)(Py-CH2-N=CH-Py)](+). One-electron oxidation of [3](-) and [4](-) produced the ligand radical complexes [3]* and [4]*. Oxygenation of [3](-) with O-2 gave the neutral carboxamido complex [Ir(cod)(py-CH2-N-CO-py)] via the ligand radical complex [3]* as a detectable intermediate.

Non-visual and multisensory BCI systems: present and future

During the past decade, brain–computer interfaces (BCIs) have rapidly developed, both in technological and application domains. However, most of these interfaces rely on the visual modality. Only some research groups have been studying non-visual BCIs, primarily based on auditory and, sometimes, on somatosensory signals. These non-visual BCI approaches are especially useful for severely disabled patients with poor vision. From a broader perspective, multisensory BCIs may offer more versatile and user-friendly paradigms for control and feedback. This chapter describes current systems that are used within auditory and somatosensory BCI research. Four categories of noninvasive BCI paradigms are employed: (1) P300 evoked potentials, (2) steady-state evoked potentials, (3) slow cortical potentials, and (4) mental tasks. Comparing visual and non-visual BCIs, we propose and discuss different possible multisensory combinations, as well as their pros and cons. We conclude by discussing potential future research directions of multisensory BCIs and related research questions

English compound and non-compound processing in bilingual and multilingual speakers: effects of dominance and sequential multilingualism

This article reports on a study investigating the relative influence of the first and dominant language on L2 and L3 morpho-lexical processing. A lexical decision task compared the responses to English NV-er compounds (e.g., taxi driver) and non-compounds provided by a group of native speakers and three groups of learners at various levels of English proficiency: L1 Spanish-L2 English sequential bilinguals and two groups of early Spanish-Basque bilinguals with English as their L3. Crucially, the two trilingual groups differed in their first and dominant language (i.e., L1 Spanish-L2 Basque vs. L1 Basque-L2 Spanish). Our materials exploit an (a)symmetry between these languages: while Basque and English pattern together in the basic structure of (productive) NV-er compounds, Spanish presents a construction that differs in directionality as well as inflection of the verbal element (V[3SG] + N). Results show between and within group differences in accuracy and response times that may be ascribable to two factors besides proficiency: the number of languages spoken by a given participant and their dominant language. An examination of response bias reveals an influence of the participants' first and dominant language on the processing of NV-er compounds. Our data suggest that morphological information in the nonnative lexicon may extend beyond morphemic structure and that, similarly to bilingualism, there are costs to sequential multilingualism in lexical retrieval.