Chloro- and phenoxy-phosphines in frustrated Lewis pair additions to alkynes
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The reaction of tBu(C(6)H(4)O(2))P, with the borane B(C(6)F(5))(3) gives rise to NMR data consistent with the formation of the classical Lewis acid-base adduct tBu(C(6)H(4)O(2))P(B(C(6)F(5))(3)) (1). In contrast, the NMR data for the corresponding reactions of tBu(C(20)H(12)O(2))P and Cl(C(20)H(12)O(2))P with B(C(6)F(5))(3) were consistent with the presence of equilibria between free phosphine and borane and the corresponding adducts. Nonetheless, in each case, the adducts tBu(C(20)H(12)O(2))P(B(C(6)F(5))(3)) (2) and Cl(C(20)H(12)O(2))P(B(C(6)F(5))(3)) (3) were isolable. The species 1 reacts with PhCCH to give the new species tBu(C(6)H(4)O(2))P(Ph)C=CHB(C(6)F(5))(3) (4) in near quantitative yield. In an analogous fashion, the addition of PhCCH to solutions of the phosphines tBu(C(20)H(12)O(2))P, tBuPCl(2) and (C(6)H(3)(2,4-tBu(2))O)(3)P each with an equivalent of B(C(6)F(5))(3) gave rise to L(Ph)C=CHB(C(6)F(5))(3) (L = tBu(C(20)H(12)O(2))P 5, tBuPCl(2)6 and (C(6)H(3)(2,4-tBu(2))O)(3)P 7). X-Ray data for 1, 2, 6 and 7 are presented. The implications of these findings are considered.
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 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) | 0.020 | 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 teacher head, 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".