Catalytic PH Activation by Ti and Zr Catalysts
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
Catalytic dehydrocoupling of phosphines was investigated using the anionic zirconocene trihydride salts [Cp*2Zr(mu-H)3Li]3 (1 a) or [Cp*2Zr(mu-H)3K(thf)4] (1 b), and the metallocycles [CpTi(NPtBu3)(CH2)4] (6) and [Cp*M(NPtBu3)(CH2)4] (M=Ti 20, Zr 21) as catalyst precursors. Dehydrocoupling of primary phosphines RPH2 (R=Ph, C6H2Me3, Cy, C10H7) gave both dehydrocoupled dimers RP(H)P(H)R or cyclic oligophosphines (RP)n (n=4, 5) while reaction of tBu3C6H2PH2 gave the phosphaindoline tBu2(Me2CCH2)C6H2PH 9. Stoichiometric reactions of these catalyst precursors with primary phosphines afforded [Cp*2Zr((PR)2)H][K(thf)4] (R=Ph 2, Cy 3, C6H2Me3 4), [Cp*2Zr((PPh)3)H][K(thf)4] (5), [CpTi(NPtBu3)(PPh)3] (7) and [CpTi(NPtBu3)(mu-PHPh)]2 (8), while reaction of 6 with (C6H2tBu3)PH2 in the presence of PMe3 afforded [CpTi(NPtBu3)(PMe3)(P(C6H2tBu3)] (10). The secondary phosphines Ph2PH and (PhHPCH2)2CH2 also undergo dehydrocoupling affording (Ph2P)2 and (PhPCH2)2CH2. The bisphosphines (CH2PH2)2 and C6H4(PH2)2 are dehydrocoupled to give (PCH2CH2PH)2)(12) and (C6H4P(PH))2 (13) while prolonged reaction of 13 gave (C6H4P2)(8) (14). The analogous bisphosphine Me2C6H4(PH)2 (17) was prepared and dehydrocoupling catalysis afforded (Me2C6H2P(PH))2 (18) and subsequently [(Me2C6H2P2)2(mu-Me2C6H2P2)]2 (19). Stoichiometric reactions with these bisphosphines gave [Cp*2Zr(H)(PH)2C6-H4][Li(thf)4] (22), [CpTi(NPtBu3)(PH)2C6H4]2 (23) and [Cp*Ti(NPtBu3)(PH)2C6H4] (24). Mechanistic implications 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.
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) | 0.004 | 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