Stereoselective Formation of (Aminoalkyl)platinum Complexes from Imines
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Reaction of [PtMe 2 (μ-SMe 2 )] 2 with cis -1,2-C 6 H 10 (N CH-2-C 5 H 4 N) 2 ( 1 ) and cis -1,2-C 6 H 10 (N CH-2-C 9 H 6 N) 2 ( 2 ) gives the complexes [PtMe 2 { cis -1,2-C 6 H 10 (N CH-2-C 5 H 4 N) 2 }] ( 3 ) and [PtMe 2 { cis -1,2-C 6 H 10 (N CH-2-C 9 H 6 N) 2 }] ( 4 ), respectively (C 5 H 4 N = pyridyl; C 9 H 6 N = quinolyl), in which the ligand is bidentate such that each complex is chiral and contains a free imine substituent. Complexes 3 and 4 react with protic acids, HCl and CF 3 CO 2 H, to form (aminoalkyl)platinum(IV) products that contain a new asymmetric carbon center, often with very high stereoselectivity. In these products the complex ligand may act as a tridentate N,N,C donor or, in complexes containing an azaplatinacyclobutane ring, as a tetradentate N,N,N,C donor. The absolute configurations of five (aminoalkyl)platinum(IV) products were determined by X-ray crystal structure determinations and gave a benchmark such that the stereochemistries of other complexes could be assigned by NMR. It is suggested that the reactions occur by protonation at the free imine nitrogen to give an iminium ion, and the carbocation then adds to the adjacent platinum(II) center. The initially formed products may rearrange by mechanisms involving reversible ligand dissociation from platinum(IV) or deprotonation of the aminoalkyl group.
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 | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
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.
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".