Reactions of 2-indolylphosphines with Ru<sub>3</sub>(CO)<sub>12</sub>: cluster capping with μ<sub>3</sub>,η<sup>2</sup>-indolylphosphine as an anionic six-electron P,N-donor ligand
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Stepwise bidentate coordination of the novel indolylphosphine ligands HL (1, HL = P(C(6)H(5))(2)(C(9)H(8)N)(diphenyl-2-(3-methylindolyl)phosphine); 2, HL = P(C(6)H(5))(C(9)H(8)N)(2)(phenyldi-2-(3-methylindolyl)phosphine); and 3, HL = P(C(6)H(5))(C(17)H(12)N(2))(di(1H-3-indolyl)methane-(2,12)-phenylphosphine)) to the ruthenium cluster Ru(3)(CO)(12) is demonstrated. Reactions of 1-3 with Ru(3)(CO)(12) led to the formation of Ru(3)(CO)(11)(HL) (4-6), in which HL is mono-coordinated through the phosphorus atom. The X-ray structures of 4-6 show that the phosphorus atom is equatorially coordinated to the triruthenium core. In all cases, gentle heating of Ru(3)(CO)(11)(HL) resulted in the formation of Ru(3)(CO)(9)(mu-H)(mu(3),eta(2)-L)(7-9) in which the NH proton of the indolyl substituent had migrated to the ruthenium core to form a bridging hydride ligand. The X-ray structure of Ru(3)(CO)(9)(mu-H)[mu(3),eta(2)-P(C(6)H(5))(2)(C(9)H(7)N)] (7) shows the deprotonated nitrogen atom of the indolyl moiety bridging over the face of the triruthenium core, bonding to the two ruthenium metal centers to which the phosphorus atom is not bound. The phosphorus atom is forced to adopt an axial bonding mode due to the geometry of the indolylphosphine ligand. Cluster electron counting and X-ray data suggest that the indolylphosphine behaves as a six-electron ligand in this mode of coordination. Compounds 4-9 have been characterized by IR, (1)H, (13)C and (31)P NMR spectroscopy.
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".