Bis(2-phenylethyl)-<i>nacnac</i>: A Chiral Diketiminate Ligand and Its Copper Complexes
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The chiral diketiminate ligand bis- N, N ′-(2-phenylethyl)-2,4-diiminopentane, 1 H, was synthesized in good yields in a one-step reaction from chiral amine and acetylacetone. Reaction of 1 Li(THF) with N -bromosuccinimide yielded the succinimide-substituted ligand 2 H. Copper complexes were obtained by reaction of the ligand with a basic copper source in the presence of coordinating Lewis bases, and 1 Cu(NCMe), 1 Cu(DMAP), 1 Cu(PPh 3 ), 1 Cu(2,6-xylyl isonitrile), 2 Cu(PPh 3 ), and 2 Cu(2,6-xylyl isonitrile) have been prepared and, for the most part, characterized by X-ray diffraction studies. Compared to their more common analogues with aromatic substituents on N, 1 and 2 seem to be more basic ( 1 > 2 ) and sterically more demanding ( 2 > 1 ). Their copper complexes are less stable than those of aryl-substituted diketiminates and tend to decompose by disproportionation, most probably after dissociation of the coordinated Lewis base. Despite the rotational freedom around the N−R* bond, the complexes are sterically rigid, a necessary requirement for potential applications in enantioselective catalysis.
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 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.012 | 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".