Reactions of a Phosphinoaldehyde with Pd<sup>II</sup>, Rh<sup>I</sup>, and Ir<sup>I</sup>Precursors, Including the Formation of Complexes Containing a P,OH-Chelated Phosphinohemiacetal Ligand: a New Bonding Mode
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The complexes trans-PdCl(2)[eta(1)-P-(Ph(2)P)CH(Ph)CH(Me)CH(OMe)(2)](2) (1) and M(H)Cl[eta(2)-P,OH-(Ph(2)P)CH(Ph)CH(Me)CH(OH)OMe][eta(2)-P,C(O)-(Ph(2)P)CH(Ph)CH(Me)C(O)], M = Rh (3) and Ir (4), are synthesized by reacting the phosphinoaldehyde [3-(diphenylphosphino)-3-phenyl-2-methyl]propionaldehyde [(Ph(2)P)(2)CH(Ph)CH(Me)CHO] with trans-PdCl(2)(PhCN)(2), [RhCl(COD)](2), and [IrCl(COD)](2), respectively, in MeOH; trans-PdCl(2)[eta(1)-P-(Ph(2)P)CH(Ph)CH(Me)CHO](2) (2) is isolated from the same reaction in CH(2)Cl(2). One diastereomer of each of the complexes 1, 3 x MeOH, and 4 x MeOH was characterized by X-ray analysis. The stereochemistry of such complexes in the solid state and in solution (MeOH and CH(2)Cl(2)) is discussed. In CD(2)Cl(2), NMR data suggest that the coordinated hemiacetal moiety of 3 (but not 4) undergoes reversible loss of MeOH; this process is associated with equilibria between various diastereomers of 3 that were investigated by (31)P{(1)H}, (13)C{(1)H}, (1)H, (1)H{(31)P}, and HSQC and HMBC (1)H/(31)P{(1)H} and (1)H/(13)C{(1)H} NMR spectroscopies. Complexes 3 and 4 reveal a new chelate bonding mode via a P atom and the hydroxyl O atom of a hemiacetal. Solvent-dependent stereochemical changes within solution species imply that such chiral phosphinoaldehydes are not likely to be useful ligands for applications in asymmetric catalysis, although conditions are suggested for testing the complexes as potential precursors for nonasymmetric catalytic processes.
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 | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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 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".