Hexaethylbenzene complexes of ruthenium and manganese X-ray crystal structures and NMR spectra of [(HEB)<sub>2</sub>Ru<sub>2</sub>(µ-Cl)<sub>3</sub>][C<sub>5</sub>(CO<sub>2</sub>Me)<sub>5</sub>], [(HEB)Ru(H<sub>2</sub>O)<sub>3</sub>][BF<sub>4</sub>]<sub>2</sub>, (HEB)RuCl<sub>2</sub>[P(OMe)<sub>3</sub>], <i>trans</i>-RuCl<sub>2</sub>(PMe<sub>3</sub>)<sub>4</sub>, and (HEB)Mn(CO)<sub>2</sub>Br
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Hexaethylbenzene (HEB) and [(p-cymene)RuCl 2 ] 2 react in the melt to yield [(HEB)RuCl 2 ] 2 (6), the NMR spectra of which reveal the presence of [(HEB) 2 Ru 2 (µ-Cl) 3 ]Cl in solution. In [(HEB) 2 Ru 2 (µ-Cl) 3 ][C 5 (CO 2 Me) 5 ] (7), the cation has D 3 h symmetry with alternating proximal and distal ethyl groups. Bridge cleavage of 6 with trimethyl phosphite or with trimethylphosphine gives (HEB)RuCl 2 [P(OMe) 3 ] (9) or (HEB)RuCl 2 (PMe 3 ) (10), respectively. The latter reaction also yields RuCl 2 (Me 3 P) 4 (11), whose structure represents a relatively rare example of a crystallographically characterized trans isomer of this type. In 9, five of the ethyl ligands are distal, whereas in 10 all six substituents are distal. Attempts to prepare the sandwich dication [(HEB) 2 Ru] 2+ gave instead [(HEB)Ru(H 2 O) 3 ](BF 4 ) 2 (8), whose NMR and X-ray data reveal the 1,3,5-distal2,4,6-proximal arrangement of ethyls both in the solid state and in solution. (HEB)Mn(CO) 2 Br (13) likewise adopts the 1,3,5-distal2,4,6-proximal structure in the solid state but, surprisingly, there is no evidence for slowed ethyl rotation in solution.Key words: hexaethylbenzene conformations, hindered rotations, crystallography, NMR, ruthenium, manganese.
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 | 0.016 | 0.007 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.030 | 0.035 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.031 | 0.018 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.015 | 0.020 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.012 | 0.019 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.010 | 0.013 |
| Open science | 0.020 | 0.007 |
| Research integrity | 0.019 | 0.028 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.002 |
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; both teacher heads agree on what is shown here.
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".