Silylene Extrusion from Organosilanes via Double Geminal Si−H Bond Activation by a Cp*Ru(κ<sup>2</sup>-<i>P</i>,<i>N</i>)<sup>+</sup> Complex: Observation of a Key Stoichiometric Step in the Glaser−Tilley Alkene Hydrosilylation Mechanism
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Treatment of Cp*RuCl(kappa2-P,N-2b) (2b = 2-NMe2-3-PiPr2-indene) with TlSO3CF3 produced the cyclometalated complex [4]+SO3CF3- in 94% isolated yield. Exposure of [4]+X- (X = B(C6F5)4 or SO3CF3) to Ph2SiH2 (10 equiv) or PhSiH3 afforded the corresponding [Cp*(mu-P,N-2b)(H)2Ru=SiRPh]+X- complexes, [5]+X- (R = Ph; X = B(C6F5)4, 82%; X = SO3CF3, 39%) and [6]+X- (R = H; X = B(C6F5)4, 94%; X = SO3CF3, 95%). Notably, these transformations represent the first documented examples of Ru-mediated silylene extrusion via double geminal Si-H bond activation of an organosilane-a key step in the recently proposed Glaser-Tilley (G-T) alkene hydrosilylation mechanism. Treatment of [5]+B(C6F5)4- with KN(SiMe3)2 or [6]+SO3CF3- with NaN(SiMe3)2 afforded the corresponding zwitterionic Cp*(mu-2-NMe2-3-PiPr2-indenide)(H)2Ru=SiRPh complex in 69% (R = Ph, 7) or 86% (R = H, 8) isolated yield. Both [6]+X- and 8 proved unreactive toward 1-hexene and styrene and provided negligible catalytic turnover in the attempted metal-mediated hydrosilylation of these substrates with PhSiH3, thereby providing further empirical evidence for the required intermediacy of base-free Ru=Si species in the G-T mechanism. Isomerization of the P,N-indene ligand backbone in [6]+X-, giving rise to [Cp*(mu-1-PiPr2-2-NMe2-indene)(H)2Ru=SiHPh]+X- ([9]+X-), was observed. In the case of [9]+SO3CF3-, net intramolecular addition of the Ru=Si-H group across the styrene-like C=C unit within the ligand backbone to give 10 (96% isolated yield) was observed. Crystallographic characterization data are provided for [4]+X-, [5]+X-, [6]+X-, 8, and 10.
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".