MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2125120974 · doi:10.1139/cjc-2015-0417

An experimental and computational comparison of phosphorus- and selenium-based ligands for catalysis

2015· article· en· W2125120974 on OpenAlexaffvenue
J.S. Ritch, Bronte J. Charette

Bibliographic record

VenueCanadian Journal of Chemistry · 2015
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutics
TopicOrganoselenium and organotellurium chemistry
Canadian institutionsUniversity of WinnipegUniversity of Manitoba
Fundersnot available
KeywordsChemistryMoietyReactivity (psychology)ChelationPalladiumLigand (biochemistry)SeleniumDensity functional theoryCatalysisCrystal structureCoordination complexStereochemistryNuclear magnetic resonance spectroscopyMedicinal chemistryCrystallographyInorganic chemistryOrganic chemistryMetalComputational chemistry

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

To compare and contrast the bonding and reactivity of organoselenium ligands with organophosphines in coordination complexes, a new palladium(II) complex of the Se,N-chelating ligand o-(NH2)(X)C6H4 (X = SePh, 2) was prepared. Its characterization by NMR spectroscopy, single-crystal X-ray diffraction, and density functional theory calculations is contrasted with the PdII complex of the related P,N- chelating ligand (X = PPh2, 1). These techniques indicate that the phenylseleno moiety is a weaker σ donor to the PdCl2 fragment than the diphenylphosphino group. Both complexes were suitable to catalyze the Suzuki–Miyaura coupling of p-tolylboronic acid and 4-bromobenzaldehyde.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.007
Threshold uncertainty score0.022

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0010.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0070.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.063
GPT teacher head0.385
Teacher spread0.322 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designBench or experimental
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations16
Published2015
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCanadian Journal of ChemistrySame topicOrganoselenium and organotellurium chemistryFrench-language works237,207