From Classical Adducts to Frustrated Lewis Pairs: Steric Effects in the Interactions of Pyridines and B(C<sub>6</sub>F<sub>5</sub>)<sub>3</sub>
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 pyridine adducts of B(C(6)F(5))(3), (4-tBu)C(5)H(4)NB(C(6)F(5))(3) 1, ((2-Me)C(5)H(4)N)B(C(6)F(5))(3) 2, ((2-Et)C(5)H(4)N)B(C(6)F(5))(3) 3, ((2-Ph)C(5)H(4)N)B(C(6)F(5))(3) 4, ((2-C(5)H(4)N)C(5)H(4)N)B(C(6)F(5))(3) 5, (C(9)H(7)N)B(C(6)F(5))(3) 6, and ((2-C(5)H(4)N)NH(2-C(5)H(4)N))B(C(6)F(5))(3) 7, were prepared and characterized. The B-N bond lengths in 2-7 reflect the impact of ortho-substitution, increasing significantly with sterically larger and electron-withdrawing substituents. In the case of 2-amino-6-picoline, reaction with B(C(6)F(5))(3) affords the zwitterionic species (5-Me)C(5)H(3)NH(2-NH)B(C(6)F(5))(3) 8. In contrast, lutidine/B(C(6)F(5))(3) yields an equilibrium mixture containing both the free Lewis acid and base and the adduct (2,6-Me(2)C(5)H(3)N)B(C(6)F(5))(3) 9. This equilibrium has a DeltaH of -42(1) kJ/mol and DeltaS of -131(5) J/mol x K. Addition of H(2) shifts the equilibrium and yields [2,6-Me(2)C(5)H(3)NH][HB(C(6)F(5))(3)] 10. The corresponding reactions of 2,6-diphenylpyridine or 2-tert-butylpyridine with B(C(6)F(5))(3) showed no evidence of adduct formation and upon exposure to H(2) afforded [(2,6-Ph(2))C(5)H(3)NH][HB(C(6)F(5))(3)] 11 and [(2-tBu)C(5)H(4)NH][HB(C(6)F(5))(3)] 12, respectively. The energetics of adduct formation and the reactions with H(2) are probed computationally. Crystallographic data for compounds 1-10 are reported.
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 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| 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