The Elusive 16-Electron Cp*M(NO)Me<sub>2</sub>(M = Mo, W) Complexes and Their Spontaneous Conversions to Cp*M(NMe)(O)Me Isomers
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Treatment of [Cp*Mo(NO)Cl(mu-Cl)](2) with magnesium (Me(2)Mg.dioxane, MeMgCl) or aluminum (Me(3)Al) methylating reagents affords the known compound [Cp*Mo(NO)Me(mu-Cl)](2) (1). Similar treatment of the dichloro precursor with MeLi in ethereal solvents generates an equimolar mixture of 1 and the trimethyl "ate" complex, Cp*MoMe(3)(NO-Li(OEt(2)(n)), (2-Et(2)O). Reaction of 2-Et(2)O with a source of [Me](+) forms Cp*MoMe(3)(=N-OMe)(3), a rare terminal alkoxylimido complex. Metathesis of the chloro ligands of [Cp*Mo(NO)Cl(mu-Cl)](2) by MeLi in toluene at low temperatures produces the target dimethyl complex, Cp*Mo(NO)Me(2) (4), in 75% isolated yield. In solution, 4 is predominantly a monomeric species, whereas in the solid state it adopts a dimeric or oligomeric structure containing isonitrosyl bridges as indicated by IR and (15)N/(13)C NMR spectroscopies. Hydrolysis of 4 affords meso- and rac-[Cp*Mo(NO)Me](2)(mu-O) (5), and the reactions of 4 with a range of Lewis bases, L, to form the 18e adducts Cp*Mo(NO)(L)Me(2) (e.g., Cp*Mo(NO)(PMe(3))Me(2) (7)), have established it to be the most electrophilic complex of its family. Acidolysis of the methyl groups of 4 is also facile. Most notably, 4 is thermally unstable in solution and undergoes isomerization via nitrosyl N-O bond cleavage to its oxo(imido) form, Cp*Mo(NMe)(O)Me (11), which is isolable from the final reaction mixture as the mu-oxo-bridged adduct formed by 4 and 11, i.e., Cp*Mo(NO)Me(2)(mu-O)Cp*Mo(NMe)Me (4 <-- 11). The rate of this isomerization is significantly faster for the tungsten dimethyl complex; hence, Cp*W(NO)Me(2) (12) is not isolable free of a supporting donor interaction and can only be isolated as Cp*W(NO)Me(2)(mu-O)Cp*W(NMe)Me (12 <-- 13) or Cp*W(NO)Me(2)(PMe(3)) (14) adducts.
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) | 0.003 | 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".