Mass Spectrometric Characterization of Methylaluminoxane‐Activated Metallocene Complexes
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Electrospray-ionization mass spectrometric studies of poly(methylaluminoxane) (MAO) in the presence of [Cp2 ZrMe2 ], [Cp2 ZrMe(Cl)], and [Cp2 ZrCl2 ] in fluorobenzene (PhF) solution are reported. The results demonstrate that alkylation and ionization are separate events that occur at competitive rates in a polar solvent. Furthermore, there are significant differences in ion-pair speciation that result from the use of metallocene dichloride complexes in comparison to alkylated precursors at otherwise identical Al/Zr ratios. Finally, the counter anions that form are dependent on the choice of precursor and Al/Zr ratio; halogenated aluminoxane anions [(MeAlO)x (Me3 Al)y-z (Me2 AlCl)z Me](-) (z=1, 2, 3…︁) are observed using metal chloride complexes and under some conditions may predominate over their non-halogenated precursors [(MeAlO)x (Me3 Al)y Me](-) . Specifically, this halogenation process appears selective for the anions that form in comparison to the neutral components of MAO. Only at very high Al/Zr ratios is the same "native" anion distribution observed when using [Cp2 ZrCl2 ] when compared with [Cp2 ZrMe2 ]. Together, the results suggest that the need for a large excess of MAO when using metallocene dichloride complexes is a reflection of competitive alkylation vs. ionization, the persistence of unreactive, homodinuclear ion pairs in the case of [Cp2 ZrCl2 ], as well as a change in ion pairing resulting from modification of the anions formed at lower Al/Zr ratios. Models for neutral precursors and anions are examined computationally.
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".