{'fraction_non_alphanumeric': 0.05101058710298364, 'fraction_numerical': 0.016361886429258902, 'mean_word_length': 5.540880503144654, 'pattern_counts': {'":': 0, '<': 0, '<?xml version=': 0, '>': 0, 'https://': 0, 'lorem ipsum': 0, 'www.': 0, 'xml': 0}, 'pii_count': 0, 'substrings_counts': 0, 'word_list_counts': {'cursed_substrings.json': 0, 'profanity_word_list.json': 0, 'sexual_word_list.json': 0, 'zh_pornsignals.json': 0}}
Insights into the Difference Between Rotaxane and Pseudorotaxane.

Rotaxane and pseudorotaxane are two types of mechanically interlocked molecular architectures, and there is a clear topological difference and boundary between them. In this work, a "suggested [2]rotaxane 1⊂α-CD" was constructed based on axle molecule 1 bearing two terminal ferrocene groups and a wheel component α-cyclodextrin (α-CD), but the result obtained indicated that the ferrocene group cannot prevent α-CD dethreading under UV irradiation. That is, 1⊂α-CD is just a pseudo[2]rotaxane. Furthermore, the two ferrocene groups in 1⊂α-CD were encapsulated by two cucurbit[7]uril (CB[7]) units to obtain a heteropseudo[4]rotaxane 1⊂α-CD⋅2CB[7]. This heteropseudo[4]rotaxane displayed high stability towards harsh temperatures and the isomerization of azobenzene in 1, so it can be regarded as a [2]rotaxane. In this [2]rotaxane, the stoppers are not the bulky groups covalently bonded to the axle, but the cyclic CB[7] units connected through noncovalent interactions.