MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Relative binding affinities of fluorobenzene ligands in cationic rhodium bisphosphine η6–fluorobenzene complexes probed using collision-induced dissociation

2014· article· en· W2063069854 on OpenAlexafffund
Sebastian D. Pike, Indrek Pernik, Robin Theron, J. Scott McIndoe, Andrew S. Weller

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Organometallic Chemistry · 2014
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutics
TopicFluorine in Organic Chemistry
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Victoria
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of CanadaEngineering and Physical Sciences Research CouncilUniversity of OxfordRoyal SocietyUniversity of Victoria
KeywordsChemistryFluorobenzeneCationic polymerizationPhosphineRhodiumDissociation (chemistry)AffinitiesElectrospray ionizationCatalysisStereochemistryCollision-induced dissociationTrans effectMass spectrometryCombinatorial chemistryMedicinal chemistryPolymer chemistryTandem mass spectrometryCrystallographyOrganic chemistryCrystal structure

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

A range of cationic rhodium bisphosphine η6-fluorobenzene (fluorobenzenes = C6H6−nFn, n = 1–3) and related complexes have been synthesized and characterized. These complexes act as useful organometallic precursors for catalysis or further synthetic elaboration. The relative binding affinity of the arene ligands has been investigated using Electrospray Ionisation Mass Spectrometry (ESI–MS) and two different collision-induced dissociation (CID) techniques. The influence of arene fluorination upon arene binding affinity is discussed as well as the comparison of different bis–phosphine ligands with regard to bite angle and phosphine substitution. We show that this simple technique allows fast and easy comparison of the binding affinity of arene ligands to cationic organometallic fragments.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow), Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: Bench or experimental
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.007
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.084
GPT teacher head0.386
Teacher spread0.302 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

Study designBench or experimental
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations31
Published2014
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Organometallic ChemistrySame topicFluorine in Organic ChemistryFrench-language works237,207