MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1978526800 · doi:10.1021/om0700361

Relating the Radical Stabilization Energy and Steric Bulk of a Hydrocarbyl Group to the Strength of its Bonds with Metals and Hydrogen. A Theoretical Study

2007· article· en· W1978526800 on OpenAlexaff
Mariusz P. Mitoraj, Hungjuan Zhu, Artur Michalak, Tom Ziegler

Bibliographic record

VenueOrganometallics · 2007
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnergy
TopicCO2 Reduction Techniques and Catalysts
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Calgary
Fundersnot available
KeywordsChemistrySteric effectsHydrogen bondAlkylMedicinal chemistryHydrogenBond energyTriple bondCarbon fibersDouble bondCrystallographyStereochemistryMoleculeOrganic chemistryComposite number

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

We have analyzed the strength of the XR bond for a number of hydrocarbyl groups (R) attached to X = hydrogen, X = (CNCH 3 )(H)(Tp)Rh [Tp = H-B(pyrazolyl) 3 ], and X = (OSi(CH 3 ) 3 )(OSi(CH 3 ) 3 )(NH-Si(CH 3 ) 3 )Ti with the help of a density functional theory (DFT) based energy decomposition scheme (EDA). The hydrocarbyl groups included had a radical sp 3 carbon with unsaturated aromatic or olefinic bonds (R 1 = Ph-CH 2, mesityl, Me-allyl, allyl) or saturated alkyl substituents (R 2 = Me, Et, Pe, i-Pr, t-Bu), a radical carbon as part of a saturated ring (R 3 = c-Pr, c-Bu, c-Pe, c-He), or a radical sp 2 carbon (R 4 = Ph, t-Bu-vinyl, Me-vinyl, vinyl). The EDA scheme was used to rationalize the relative order of the X−R i bond energies between groups ( i = 1,4), within groups (same i ), and between metals X = Rh, Ti, and hydrogen (X = H). It was found that the average bond energy within each group increases as R 4 > R 3 ∼ R 2 > R 1 for the two metals as well as H. This trend correlates with the radical stabilization energy of R i that decreases in absolute terms as R 4 < R 3 ∼ R 1 < R 2 . This trend enables one to make rough correlations between M−C bonds and M−H links on going from one group to another. Within each of the XR i systems where i = 1, 3, 4 there is also a correlation between the trend in the X−R i bond energies and the R i distortion energy. However, for the R 2 group trends in the X−R 2 bond energies are not determined by the radical stabilization but directly (X = H) or indirectly (X = Rh, Ti) by increasing steric bulk on R 2 . For X = H, steric bulk directly destabilizes the H−R 2 bond by increasing the steric interaction between H and R 2 without significantly changing the H−C bond distance. For X = Rh, Ti steric bulk indirectly destabilizes the M−R 2 bond by increasing the M−C bond distance in order to relieve the steric strain. This leads to a reduction in the M−C bonding overlap and the M−C bond strength. We note finally that the Rh−R i and Ti−R i bonds are some 60 kcal/mol weaker than the H−R i link. The major contributing factor here is the poorer overlap and larger energy gap between the orbitals involved in forming the M−C bond compared to the H−C link. Additional factors are larger steric interactions and the need for some distortion of the Rh and Ti fragments.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.005
Threshold uncertainty score0.016

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0050.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.009
GPT teacher head0.229
Teacher spread0.220 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designTheoretical or conceptual
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations24
Published2007
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueOrganometallicsSame topicCO2 Reduction Techniques and CatalystsFrench-language works237,207