A Highly Reactive Ruthenium Phosphido Complex Exhibiting Ru−P π-Bonding
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Multiple bonding in the terminal phosphido complex [Ru(PCy 2 )(η 5 -indenyl)(PPh 3 )] ( 2a ) is clearly demonstrated by solution, solid-state, and computational studies. Reactions of this dark blue, half-sandwich complex with CO, MeI, HNEt 3 Cl, HCl, NH 4 PF 6, H 2, and Et 3 SiH demonstrate an unusual range of behavior resulting from combined coordinative unsaturation at Ru, high nucleophilicity/basicity of the phosphido P, and π-character of the Ru−P interaction. The terminal, π-bound phosphido structure is general for a range of PR 2 species (R = Pr i ( 2b ), Ph ( 2c ), Tol p ( 2d )). The very reactive diarylphosphido analogues 2c, d have been observed spectroscopically at low temperatures and can be trapped quantitatively as their CO adducts, [Ru(PAr 2 )(η 5 -indenyl)(CO)(PPh 3 )] ( 3c, d ), in which the Ru−P bond order is reduced to 1. Complex 2a and its analogue [Ru(PPr i 2 )(η 5 -indenyl)(PPh 3 )] ( 2b ) are consistently isolated with ∼15% of their structural isomers, the ruthenium hydrido phosphaalkenes 9a, b, resulting from an apparent 1,2-H shift.
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) | 0.001 | 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 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".