Zinc complexes of anionic NPPN and NP(S)PN ligands and rearrangement to the isomeric NPNP and NP(S)NP ligands in mercury complexes
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The lithium (imido)diphosphineimide Li(Et2O)[DippNPhP-P((n)Bu)PhNDipp] (1) (Dipp = 2,6-(i)Pr2C6H3) undergoes simple metathesis reactions with equimolar amounts of zinc halides, ZnCl2 and (t)BuZnBr, to give the respective N,N'-chelated complexes {Zn(micro-Cl)[DippNPhP-P((n)Bu)PhNDipp]}2 (2) and (t)BuZn[NDippPhP-P((n)Bu)PhNDipp] (3). In contrast, the reaction of two equivalents of complex 1 with HgCl2 affords the rearranged bis(imidodiphosphinoamine) complex, Hg[PhP([double bond, length as m-dash]NDipp)(micro-NDipp)P((n)Bu)Ph]2 (4), where the ligand acts as a P-centered anion. The (imido)diphosphineimide backbone of remains intact on oxidation with elemental sulfur to afford the lithium (imido)diphosphineimine sulfide complex, Li(Et2O)[DippNPhP(S)-P((n)Bu)PhNDipp] (6). Reactions of 6 with group 12 metal halides show similar behaviour to those of complex 1. The N,N' chelated metathesis products RZn[DippNPhP(S)-P((n)Bu)PhNDipp] (7, R = Cl; 8, R = (t)Bu) are obtained on reaction with ZnCl2 and (t)BuZnBr, respectively. Isomerization of the ligand backbone occurs on reaction of 6 with HgCl2 to form the homoleptic P,S-chelated mercury complex Hg[Ph(S)P(=NDipp)(micro-NDipp)P((n)Bu)Ph]2 (9). Complexes 2, 3, 4, 6, 8 and 9 have been characterized by X-ray crystallography.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| 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) | 0.002 | 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 itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".