Bond activation by group-11 transition-metal cations
Bibliographic record
Abstract
We have computationally explored C–X bond activation by the group-11 transition-metal cations Cu+, Ag+, and Au+, and, for comparison, Pd, using relativistic density functional theory (DFT) at ZORA-BLYP/TZ2P. Oxidative insertion of the second-row transition-metal species Ag+ and Pd leads, for a given bond, to the highest overall reaction barriers. On the other hand, if we compare the different bonds oxidative insertion into the C–F bond is associated with (one of the) highest overall barriers whereas insertion into the C–Cl bond leads to the lowest overall barrier for any transition metal. The main trends in reactivity are rationalized using the activation strain model of chemical reactivity, which is an extension of the fragment approach to reaction profiles. In this model, the shape of the reaction profile ΔE(ζ) and the height of the overall reaction barrier ΔE≠ = ΔE(ζ=ζTS) are interpreted in terms of the strain energy ΔEstrain(ζ) associated with deforming the reactants along the reaction coordinate ζ plus the interaction energy ΔEint(ζ) between these deformed reactants: ΔE(ζ) = ΔEstrain(ζ) + ΔEint(ζ).
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 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.010 | 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".