[Ni<sup>0</sup>L]-Catalyzed Cyclodimerization of 1,3-Butadiene: A Density Functional Investigation of the Influence of Electronic and Steric Factors on the Regulation of the Selectivity
Bibliographic record
Abstract
We present a comprehensive theoretical investigation of the influence of the ligand L on the regulation of the product selectivity for the [Ni(0)L]-catalyzed cyclodimerization of 1,3-butadiene. The investigation was based on density functional theory (DFT) and a combined DFT and molecular mechanics (QM/MM) approach for the real [bis(butadiene)Ni(0)L] catalysts with L = PMe(3), I; PPh(3), II; P((i)Pr)(3), III; and P(OPh)(3), IV. The role of electronic and steric effects has been elucidated for all crucial elementary steps of the entire catalytic cycle. Allylic isomerization, allylic enantioface conversion, as well as oxidative coupling are shown to be influenced to a minor extent by electronic and steric effects. In contrast, the ligand's properties have a distinct influence on the preestablished equilibrium between the eta(3),eta(1)(C(1)) and bis-eta(3) forms 2 and 4, respectively, of the [(octadienediyl)Ni(II)L] complex and on the rate-determining reductive elimination following competing routes for generation of either VCH, cis-1,2-DVCB, or cis,cis-COD. Electronic factors are shown to predominantly determine the position of the kinetically mobile 2 right harpoon over left harpoon 4 equilibrium. 4 is the prevailing species for ligands L that are pi-acceptors (L = P(OPh)(3)) or weak sigma-donors (L = PPh(3)), while stronger sigma-donors (L = PMe(3), P((i)Pr)(3)) displace the equilibrium to the left. Steric bulk on the ligand as well as its pi-acceptor ability act to facilitate the reductive elimination, while sigma-donor abilities serve to retard this process. Electronic and steric factors are found to not influence uniformly the reductive elimination routes with either 2 or 4 involved. The regulation of the product selectivity is elucidated on the basis of both thermodynamic and kinetic considerations.
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.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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 itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".