Substituent effects on silene reactivity — Reactive silenes from photolysis of phenylated tri- and tetrasilanes
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Laser flash photolysis of 2-phenylheptamethyltrisilane (5d), 2,2-diphenylhexamethyltrisilane (5e), and phenyltris(trimethylsilyl)silane (5f) in hexane and acetonitrile solution affords strong, long-lived transient absorptions centered in the 440–470 nm range, which are assigned to the transient silenes formed via [1,3]-trimethylsilyl migration into the ortho-position of a phenyl ring on the basis of their UV–vis spectra and kinetic data for their reactions with methanol (MeOH), acetic acid (AcOH), acetone, 2,3-dimethyl-1,3-butadiene (DMB), carbon tetrachloride (CCl4), and oxygen. The silene derivatives are formed along with the corresponding silylenes (SiMePh, SiPh2, and Si(SiMe3)Ph, respectively) upon photolysis of these compounds in solution, and indeed, weak, short-lived transient absorptions assignable to the silylenes can also be detected in laser photolysis experiments with the three compounds in hexane, superimposed on the much more prominent absorptions due to the silenes. The silylene absorptions are quenched by MeOH and triethylsilane (Et3SiH) with absolute rate constants varying over the narrow ranges of (1.1–1.8) × 1010 (mol/L)–1 s–1 and (2.5–3.6) × 109 (mol/L)–1 s–1, respectively, in excellent agreement with previously reported values for SiPh2 and SiMe2 under the same conditions. The kinetic data obtained for the silenes are compared to previously reported data for the reactions of the same substrates with the related silenes (6a–6c) formed by photolysis of pentamethylphenyl-, 1,1,1,2-tetramethyl-2,2-diphenyl-, and 1,1,1-trimethyl-2,2,2-triphenyldisilane (5a–5c, respectively) under similar conditions. The comparison provides the first systematic, quantitative assessment of the stabilizing effects of trialkylsilyl substitution at the silenic silicon atom in silene derivatives.Key words: silene, silylene, trisilane, tetrasilane, kinetics.
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) | 0.001 | 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) | 0.003 | 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".