Solution Reactions of a Bis(pyrrolylaldiminate)copper(II) Complex with Peralkyl Zinc, Aluminum, and Boron Reagents: Investigation of the Pathways Responsible for Copper Metal Deposition
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The solution reactions of bis( N -isopropylpyrrolylaldiminate)copper(II) (CuL 2 ) with AlMe 3, BEt 3, and ZnEt 2 have been studied. In all cases, reduction occurs in two stages via a stable copper(I) pyrrolylaldiminate complex (Cu 2 L 2 ), with each stage initiated by copper alkyl complex formation. Reduction from “LCuR” (R = Me or Et) occurs with release of R 2 or L−R, consistent with bimolecular C−C or C−N bond-forming reductive elimination. At room temperature or below, copper deposition from “CuMe” occurs exclusively via reductive elimination of ethane, whereas decomposition of “CuEt” yields ethylene, ethane, and hydrogen, indicative of both β-hydride elimination and reductive elimination. The reaction byproducts [Cu 2 L 2 ], [LAlMe 2 ], [L 2 AlMe], [AlL 3 ], [LBEt 2 ], [LZnEt], [ZnL 2 ], L−Me, and L−Et were synthesized independently and isolated as pure compounds. All compounds are thermally stable, with the exception of LZnEt, which undergoes ligand redistribution to form ZnL 2 and ZnEt 2 in solution and as a solid at elevated temperatures. With the exception of [LZnEt] and [Cu 2 L 2 ], these complexes are also volatile; monoligated [LAlMe 2 ] and [LBEt 2 ] are particularly volatile, and therefore more desirable as byproducts in ALD or pulsed-CVD.
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 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) | 0.001 | 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 teacher head, 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".