Influence of Cyclopentadienyl Ring‐Tilt on Electron‐Transfer Reactions: Redox‐Induced Reactivity of Strained [2] and [3]Ruthenocenophanes
Bibliographic record
Abstract
In contrast to ruthenocene [Ru(η(5) -C5 H5 )2 ] and dimethylruthenocene [Ru(η(5) -C5 H4 Me)2 ] (7), chemical oxidation of highly strained, ring-tilted [2]ruthenocenophane [Ru(η(5) -C5 H4 )2 (CH2 )2 ] (5) and slightly strained [3]ruthenocenophane [Ru(η(5) -C5 H4 )2 (CH2 )3 ] (6) with cationic oxidants containing the non-coordinating [B(C6 F5 )4 ](-) anion was found to afford stable and isolable metalmetal bonded dicationic dimer salts [Ru(η(5) -C5 H4 )2 (CH2 )2 ]2 [B(C6 F5 )4 ]2 (8) and [Ru(η(5) -C5 H4 )2 (CH2 )3 ]2 [B(C6 F5 )4 ]2 (17), respectively. Cyclic voltammetry and DFT studies indicated that the oxidation potential, propensity for dimerization, and strength of the resulting RuRu bond is strongly dependent on the degree of tilt present in 5 and 6 and thereby degree of exposure of the Ru center. Cleavage of the RuRu bond in 8 was achieved through reaction with the radical source [(CH3 )2 NC(S)SSC(S)N(CH3 )2 ] (thiram), affording unusual dimer [(CH3 )2 NCS2 Ru(η(5) -C5 H4 )(η(3) -C5 H4 )C2 H4 ]2 [B(C6 F5 )4 ]2 (9) through a haptotropic η(5) -η(3) ring-slippage followed by an apparent [2+2] cyclodimerization of the cyclopentadienyl ligand. Analogs of possible intermediates in the reaction pathway [C6 H5 ERu(η(5) -C5 H4 )2 C2 H4 ][B(C6 F5 )4 ] [E=S (15) or Se (16)] were synthesized through reaction of 8 with C6 H5 EEC6 H5 (E=S or Se).
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) | 0.002 | 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".