Kinetics and mechanisms of the reactions of transient silylenes with amines
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The N–H insertion reactions of dimethyl‐, diphenyl‐, and dimesitylsilylene (SiMe 2 , SiPh 2 , and SiMes 2 , respectively) with n ‐butylamine (BuNH 2 ) and diethylamine (Et 2 NH) were studied in hexanes by steady‐state and laser photolysis methods. The process begins with the formation of the corresponding Lewis acid–base complexes, which decayed with second‐order kinetics at rates that show modest sensitivity to silylene and amine structures. The complexation process, which was also studied using triethylamine (Et 3 N), proceeds at rates close to the diffusion limit, but the rate constants vary systematically with steric bulk in the amine. Equilibrium constants were determined for the complexation of Et 2 NH and Et 3 N with SiMes 2 , which proceeds reversibly. The complexes of SiMe 2 and SiPh 2 with BuNH 2 and Et 2 NH decayed with pseudo‐first‐order rate coefficients in the 10 4 –10 5 s –1 range. This is consistent with upper limits of about 10 6 M –1 s –1 for the rate constants for amine‐catalyzed H‐migration, which is thought to be the dominant mechanism for product formation from the complexes. The results are compared to published kinetic data for the O–H insertion reactions of these silylenes with alcohols, which also proceeds via initial complexation followed by catalytic proton transfer. The results indicate that catalyzed H‐transfer in the amine complexes is at least 10 4 times slower than the analogous process in silylene–MeOH complexes. The experimental data are compared to the results of theoretical calculations of the SiMe 2 + NH 2 Me and SiMe 2 + MeOH potential energy surfaces, carried out at the Gaussian‐4 and B3LYP/6‐311 + G(d,p) levels of theory. Copyright © 2011 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.
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.
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 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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 it