MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2005788423 · doi:10.1021/om100144y

Chromium(III) Bis(diketiminate) Complexes

2010· article· en· W2005788423 on OpenAlexaff
S. Latreche, Frank Schaper

Bibliographic record

VenueOrganometallics · 2010
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldChemistry
TopicOrganometallic Complex Synthesis and Catalysis
Canadian institutionsUniversité de Montréal
Fundersnot available
KeywordsChemistryHomolepticIsocyanideOctahedronBimetallic stripDiethyl etherMedicinal chemistryLigand (biochemistry)ChromiumRedistribution (election)TetrahydrofuranStereochemistryCrystallographyCrystal structureOrganic chemistryCatalysisMetal

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Reaction of two equivalents of the lithium salt of N, N ′-dibenzyl-2-amino-4-iminopent-2-ene, nacnac Bn Li(THF), 1, with CrCl 3 (THF) 3 or CrCl 3 yielded nacnac Bn 2 CrCl as a putative intermediate, which could be trapped by addition of 2,6-xylyl isocyanide to give the isocyanide-coordinated, octahedral complex nacnac Bn 2 CrCl(CNC 6 Me 2 H 3 ), 5 . In the absence of isocyanide, ligand redistribution to the homoleptic tris(diketiminate) complex nacnac Bn 3 Cr, 3, occurred upon concentration, standing, or workup with apolar solvents. Workup with diethyl ether afforded the bimetallic-bridged complex nacnac Bn 2 Cr(μ-Cl) 2 Li(THF) 2, 6 . Reaction of CrCl 3 (THF) 3 with one equivalent of 1 afforded the monodiketiminate complexes { nacnac Bn CrCl(THF)(μ-Cl)} 2 or { nacnac Bn CrCl(μ-Cl)} 2, depending on reaction conditions. Reaction of CrCl 2 (THF) x with two equivalents of 1 gave rise to nacnac Bn 2 Cr, 4 . Complexes 3 − 6 were characterized by X-ray diffraction studies. All octahedral complexes display a cis geometry with two nacnac ligands in a distorted, boat-like conformation.

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: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: Bench or experimental
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.002
Threshold uncertainty score0.007

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 communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
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 head0.009
GPT teacher head0.217
Teacher spread0.208 · 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

Citations18
Published2010
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

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