MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2002893177 · doi:10.1021/om050259w

Electronic Control of Conformation in Mixed-Phosphine Complexes of the Ruthenium η<sup>5</sup>-Indenyl Fragment

2005· article· en· W2002893177 on OpenAlexaff
Eric J. Derrah, Jazmin Marlinga, Debbie Mitra, D.M. Friesen, Shaun A. Hall, Robert McDonald, Lisa Rosenberg

Bibliographic record

VenueOrganometallics · 2005
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldChemistry
TopicOrganometallic Complex Synthesis and Catalysis
Canadian institutionsUniversity of ManitobaUniversity of VictoriaUniversity of Alberta
Fundersnot available
KeywordsChemistryPhosphineRutheniumLigand (biochemistry)Ring (chemistry)HydrideStereochemistryCrystallographyOrganic chemistryMetalCatalysis

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The solid-state conformations of a series of new, mixed secondary and tertiary phosphine complexes of the general formula [Ru(η 5 -indenyl)Cl(PPh 3 )(HPR 2 )] have been shown to persist in solution, largely because of the electronic requirements of the ancillary η 5 -indenyl ligand in these complexes. The crystallographically observed conformations, with the indenyl benzo ring lying anti to the secondary phosphine across the Ru−η 5 -indenyl bond, were diagnosed in solution from chemical shift differences for PPh 3 signals in the low-temperature-limiting 1 H and 13 C NMR spectra. These conformations were tuned by varying the relative trans influences of the different piano-stool legs, in particular through preparation of the analogous hydrido complexes [Ru(η 5 -indenyl)H(PPh 3 )(HPR 2 )], which resulted in structures with the indenyl benzo ring anti to the hydride ligand. These studies provide evidence for the reasonably strong trans influence of coordinated secondary phosphines relative to PPh 3 . Implications for the ancillary ligand behavior of secondary phosphines are discussed.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
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 score0.058
Threshold uncertainty score0.986

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0150.000

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 head0.006
GPT teacher head0.196
Teacher spread0.190 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

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

Citations18
Published2005
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueOrganometallicsSame topicOrganometallic Complex Synthesis and CatalysisFrench-language works237,207