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 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 | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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".