Polar Copolymerization by a Palladium−Diimine-Based Catalyst. Influence of the Catalyst Charge and Polar Substituent on Catalyst Poisoning and Polymerization Activity. A Density Functional Theory Study
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Combined gradient-corrected density functional theory and molecular mechanics (QM/MM) has been used to investigate the copolymerization of ethylene with the CH 2 CHX α-olefins, where X = −H, −Me, −CN, −COOMe, −OC(O)−Me, −Cl. The cationic N∧N−Pd(II) diimine complex and its modified neutral and anionic derivatives have been used as catalysts, where N∧N = −NR‘ ‘CR 2 CR 3 NR‘ ‘−, R‘ ‘ = aryl group, and R 2, R 3 = BH 3 -, H. The consecutive insertion steps of CH 2 CHX into the Pd−CH 3 bond and of ethylene into the Pd−C(X)HCH 2 CH 3 bond have been investigated. Focus has been put on the role of the X functional groups and the effect of the cationic, neutral, and anionic environments on the Pd(II)−diimine system. Calculations have been performed on the CH 2 CHX monomers, model catalysts, precursor π-complexes, and σ-complexes of the monomers, as well as the chelate and H-agostic insertion products. The transition state of the insertion reaction and the corresponding activation energy was determined for both investigated insertion steps. The results show that the X group has only a minor effect on the insertion of the CH 2 CHX monomers into the Pd−CH 3 bond. On the other hand, the barrier for insertion of ethylene into the Pd−CHXR bond revealed an increase with the electron-withdrawing ability of X. We predict that the application of neutral and anionic catalysts leads to a preference for π-complexation over σ-complexation of the polar monomers. Unfortunately, for an anionic model system the barriers for the first and second insertion are significantly increased for ethylene, whereas the first insertion barrier for the polar monomers only is moderately increased. Thus, while anionic catalysts are highly tolerant toward polar monomers, they are nearly inactive toward ethylene insertion.
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) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 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".