Synthesis and Structural Diversity of ZnCl<sub>2</sub> and Zn(C<sub>6</sub>F<sub>5</sub>)<sub>2</sub> Complexes of a Phosphinimine Ligand
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract Zinc complexes of the potentially bidentate neutral monophosphinimine ligand 4‐(ArN=PPh2)dibenzofuran were prepared. Two derivatives of this framework were studied, which differ in the steric demand of the N‐aryl group (Ar = Dipp, Mes). The ligand interacts with diethylzinc in solution but does not form a tightly bound complex, whereby the degree of association is found to be dependent on temperature. However, isolable complexes are formed upon reaction with the more Lewis acidic precursors ZnCl2 and Zn(C6F5)2. In this way, the ZnCl2 complexes 1 and 2 and Zn(C6F5)2 complexes 3 and 4 were prepared and structurally characterized. The nuclearity of 1 and 2 was shown to depend on the bulk of the ligand. Furthermore, the strength of the bonding interaction between the zinc atoms and the dibenzofuran oxygen atoms in 3 and 4 also depends on the choice of ancillary ligand. Attempts to further derivatize these complexes were unsuccessful, and thus, functionalization of the complex LZnEt(OTf) was undertaken instead, resulting in formation of the novel linear trinuclear complex 5.
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 | 0.000 | 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".