Superamidines 2. Synthesis of the bulky ligand <i>N</i>,<i>N</i>'-bis-(2,6-diisopropylphenyl)-trifluoroacetamidine and its molybdenum carbonyl complex
Bibliographic record
Abstract
N,N'-bis-(2,6-diisopropylphenyl)trifluoroacetamidine has been prepared for the first time from 2,6-diisopropylaniline and the trifluoroacylation reagent TFAP via the imidoylchloride. The crystal structure of the amidine was determined, indicating that it crystallizes in the Z-anti tautomer, in contrast to the nonfluorinated analogue, which is E-anti in the solid state. In solution, as indicated by NMR spectroscopy, it exists in two isomeric forms. The amidine reacts with Mo(CO) 6 to produce a coordination complex with Mo(CO) 3 in which the ligand is also in the Z-anti geometry, the metal is η 6 -coordinated to the imino-2,6-diisopropylphenyl ring, and the amino N-H unit is directed towards the metal, as determined by a single-crystal X-ray structure. Unlike the analogous nonfluorinated acetamidine, there is no indication of an intermediate in which the neutral amidine is coordinated in a monodentate fashion to an Mo(CO) 5 unit, which we now attribute to the predominant geometry of the ligand, both in the solid state and in solution, being Z-anti. The high steric bulk of this superamidine ligand apparently prevents the formation of a metal-metal bonded Mo 2 (amidinate) 4 as observed previously in a redox reaction between N,N'-diphenylbenzamidine and Mo(CO) 6 under similar thermal reaction conditions.Key words: trifluoromethyl, superamidine, amidine, molybdenum, carbonyl, coordination.
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 distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.024 | 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 teacher head, 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".