MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1982280780 · doi:10.1021/om900679w

A Kinetics Study of the Oxidative Addition of Bromobenzene to Pd(PCy<sub>3</sub>)<sub>2</sub>(Cy = cyclohexyl) in a Nonpolar Medium: The Influence on Rates of Added PCy<sub>3</sub>and Bromide Ion

2009· article· en· W1982280780 on OpenAlexaff
Emily A. Mitchell, Philip G. Jessop, Michael C. Baird

Bibliographic record

VenueOrganometallics · 2009
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldChemistry
TopicCatalytic Cross-Coupling Reactions
Canadian institutionsQueen's University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsChemistryBromobenzenePalladiumOxidative additionMedicinal chemistryBromideKineticsTolueneOxidative phosphorylationSalt (chemistry)Inorganic chemistryCatalysisPhotochemistryOrganic chemistry

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Bromobenzene oxidatively adds to the palladium(0) compound Pd(PCy 3 ) 2 to give cleanly the palladium(II) product trans -PdBr(Ph)(PCy 3 ) 2 . Kinetics studies of this reaction under pseudo-first-order conditions (excess PhBr) as well as in the presence of 1 molar equiv of PCy 3 or of added bromide ion (as the toluene-soluble tetraoctylphosphonium salt) have been carried out. We find that oxidative addition is first-order in palladium and that, in the absence of added PCy 3, the reaction involves both the 2:1 species Pd(PCy 3 ) 2 and the 1:1 species Pd(PCy 3 ). Interestingly, added PCy 3 results in inhibition of oxidative addition both by decreasing the relative amount of the reactive 1:1 compound and by converting much of the palladium(0) to the kinetically less active 3:1 compound Pd(PCy 3 ) 3 . Added bromide ion has essentially no effect on the rate, surprising in view of previous literature reports.

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)0.001
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: Bench or experimental
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.002
Threshold uncertainty score0.006

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.001

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 head0.010
GPT teacher head0.247
Teacher spread0.236 · 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 designBench or experimental
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

Citations45
Published2009
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueOrganometallicsSame topicCatalytic Cross-Coupling ReactionsFrench-language works237,207