Density Functional Theory Investigation of the Alkyl–Alkyl Negishi Cross‐Coupling Reaction Catalyzed by N‐Heterocyclic Carbene (NHC)–Pd Complexes
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract Why bigger is better: A “steric wall” created by the N‐(2,6‐diisopropylphenyl) substituent on the bulky NHC ligand IPr (1,3‐bis(2,6‐diisopropylphenyl)imidazol‐2‐ylidene) guides the reactants to and from the Pd center through weak, fleeting (IPr)H–Pd interactions that help the oxidative addition intermediate escape “the anti‐trap”. The alternative “side” approach leads to transmetalation (the rate‐limiting step) for which a novel Pd–Zn interaction was identified. magnified image A novel mechanism is proposed for the Pd–1,3‐(2,6‐diisopropylphenyl)imidazolyl‐2‐ylidene (1) catalyzed Negishi reaction. DFT computations supported by atoms‐in‐molecules (AIM) analyses of non‐truncated models show that a “steric wall” created by the N‐substituent on the ligand guides reactants to and from the Pd center. Notably, transmetalation and not oxidative addition is found to be rate‐limiting. Additionally, a key Pd–Zn interaction (≈2.4 Å, ρb≈0.0600 au) is identified in the mechanism. This interaction persists beyond reductive elimination and, in combination with the ligand, facilitates reductive elimination by creating a highly sterically crowded environment in the coordination sphere of the Pd center.
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 | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.008 | 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".