Boron and Aluminum Complexes of Sterically Demanding Phosphinimines and Phosphinimides
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Reactions of sterically demanding phosphinimines R3PNH [R=i-Pr (1), t-Bu (2)] were examined. Reactions with B(C6F5)3 formed the adducts (R3PNH)B(C6F5)3 [R=i-Pr (3), t-Bu (4)] in high yield. On the other hand, 2 reacts with HB(OBu)2, evolving H2 to give t-Bu3PNB(OBu)2 (5). The reaction of 2 equiv of 2 with BH3.SMe2 affords the species (t-Bu3PN)2BH (6). In contrast, the reaction of n-Bu(t-Bu)2PNH with BH3.SMe2 results in the formation of the robust adduct n-Bu(t-Bu)2PNH.BH3 (8). An alternative route to borane-phosphinimide complexes involves Me3SiCl elimination, as exemplified by the reaction of BCl2Ph with n-Bu3PNSiMe3, which gives the product n-Bu3PNBCl(Ph) (9). The corresponding reactions of the parent phosphinimines 1 and 2 with AlH3.NMe2Et give the dimers [(mu-i-Pr3PN)AlH2]2 (10) and [(mu-t-Bu3PN)AlH2]2 (11). Species 11 reacts further with Me3SiO3SCF3 to provide [(mu-t-Bu3PN)AlH(OSO2CF3)]2 (12). The reaction of the lithium salt [t-Bu3PNLi]4 (13) with BCl3 proceeds smoothly to give t-Bu3PNBCl2 (14), which is readily alkylated to give t-Bu3PNBMe2 (15). Subsequent reaction of 15 with B(C6F5)3 results in methyl abstraction and the formation of [(mu-t-Bu3PN)BMe]2[MeB(C6F5)3]2 (16). The reaction of 13 in a 2:1 ratio with BCl3 gives the salt [(t-Bu3PN)2B]Cl (17). This species can be methylated to give (t-Bu3PN)2BMe (18), which undergoes subsequent reaction with [Ph3C][X] (X=[B(C6F5)4], [PF6]) to form the related salts [(t-Bu3PN)2B][B(C6F5)4] (19) and [(t-Bu3PN)2B][PF6] (20), respectively. Analogous reactions with [Ph3C][BF4] afforded [t-Bu3PNBF2]2 (21). Compounds 3, 4, 6, 8, 11, 12, 17, 19, and 21 were characterized by X-ray crystallography.
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) | 0.002 | 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".