N‐Heterocyclic Carbene Rhodium Complexes and Their Reactions with H<sub>2</sub> and with CO
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract The NHC‐Rh I complexes [RhCl(COE)(NHC)] 2 1 and 2 [COE = cyclooctene, NHC in 1 = N , N ‐bis(2,6‐diisopropylphenyl)imidazol‐2‐ylidene (IPr) and, in 2 , N , N ‐bis(2,4,6‐trimethylphenyl)imidazol‐2‐ylidene (IMes)] react with H 2 in hexane to give the dimeric, mono‐carbene dihydrido species [Rh(H) 2 Cl(NHC)] 2 (NHC = IPr ( 3 ), IMes ( 4 )). In the presence offurther NHC, the bis‐carbene dihydrido species Rh(H) 2 Cl(NHC) 2 are formed; a crystal structure of the IPr complex 5 is analogous to that of the known IMes analogue. The dihydride‐mixed‐carbene species Rh(H) 2 Cl(IPr)(IMes) ( 5a ) was also observed but not isolated. A benzene solution of 5 under D 2 slowly generates the corresponding dideuteride. Reactions of the mono‐carbenes ( 1 / 3 , or 2 / 4 ) with CO in hexane afford the respective dicarbonyl complexes RhCl(CO) 2 (NHC) [NHC = IPr ( 6 ), IMes ( 7 )], while CO reactions with the bis‐carbene dihydrides give, respectively, the mono‐carbonyl complex RhCl(CO)(IPr) 2 ( 8 ) and the known IMes analogue. All the complexes are characterized by elemental analysis, 1 H and 13 C{ 1 H} NMR and IR spectroscopies and, in the case of 5 , by X‐ray crystallography. The catalytic activities of 5 and the previously reported Rh(H) 2 Cl(IMes) 2 for hydrogenation of COE and 1‐octene (and isomerization of the latter) are shown to be poor.(© Wiley‐VCH Verlag GmbH & Co. KGaA, 69451 Weinheim, Germany, 2009)
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) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 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 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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".