Ti and Zr complexes of ferrocenyl amidinates
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Preparation of a N-ferrocenyl-amidinate complex was achieved by employing (TMEDA)Li[(CpFeC(5)H(4))NC(Ph)NSiMe(3)] (1) to prepare Cp*Zr[(CpFeC(5)H(4))NC(Ph)NSiMe(3)]Cl(2) (2). Complex 2 exhibited poor polymerization activity and thus a series of C-ferrocenyl bis(amidinate) complexes of the type M(L)(2)Cl(2) (M = Zr, 4; M = Ti, 5; L = (CyNC(CpFeC(5)H(4))NCy) were synthesized via reaction of ferrocenyl-amidine, H(L) and M(NMe(2))(2)Cl(2) (M = Ti, Zr·2THF). Half sandwich mono(amidinate) complexes, Cp'ZrLCl(2) (Cp' = Cp, 7; Cp' = Cp*, 8), were prepared by the reaction of Cp'ZrCl(3) with Li(L) and subsequently alkylated to give M(L)(2)Me(2) (M = Zr, 9; M = Ti, 11), CpZr(L)(CH(2)Ph)(2) (12) and Cp*Zr(L)Me(2) (10) with the appropriate alkylating agent. Abstraction of a methyl group from 7 with B(C(6)F(5))(3) and [Ph(3)C][B(C(6)F(5))(4)] proceeded cleanly to give [{CyNC(CpFeC(5)H(4))NCy}(2)ZrMe][MeB(C(6)F(5))(3)] 13 and [{CyNC(CpFeC(5)H(4))NCy}(2)ZrMe][B(C(6)F(5))(4)] 14, respectively. Similarly, the analogous CpZr and Cp*Zr derivatives LZr{CyNC(CpFeC(5)H(4))NCy}CH(2)Ph] [PhCH(2)B(C(6)F(5))(3)] L = Cp 15, Cp* 17 and [LZr{CyNC(CpFeC(5)H(4))NCy}CH(2)Ph][B(C(6)F(5))(4)] L = Cp 16, Cp* 18 were prepared. Cyclic voltammetry studies on the metal complexes containing ferrocenyl-amidinates reveal quasi reversible oxidation and reduction waves for the ferrocene/ferrocenium couple. The dichloride complexes (4-8) activated with MAO and dialkyl complexes (9,10) activated with B(C(6)F(5))(3) and [Ph(3)C][B(C(6)F(5))(4)] showed low ethylene polymerization activities.
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) | 0.000 | 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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.031 | 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".