Experimental and Theoretical Study of CO<sub>2</sub> Insertion into Ruthenium Hydride Complexes
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The ruthenium hydride [RuH(CNN)(dppb)] (1; CNN = 2-aminomethyl-6-tolylpyridine, dppb = 1,4-bis(diphenylphosphino)butane) reacts rapidly and irreversibly with CO2 under ambient conditions to yield the corresponding Ru formate complex 2. In contrast, the Ru hydride 1 reacts with acetone reversibly to generate the Ru isopropoxide, with the reaction free energy ΔG°(298 K) = -3.1 kcal/mol measured by (1)H NMR in tetrahydrofuran-d8. Density functional theory (DFT), calibrated to the experimentally measured free energies of ketone insertion, was used to evaluate and compare the mechanism and energetics of insertion of acetone and CO2 into the Ru-hydride bond of 1. The calculated reaction coordinate for acetone insertion involves a stepwise outer-sphere dihydrogen transfer to acetone via hydride transfer from the metal and proton transfer from the N-H group on the CNN ligand. In contrast, the lowest energy pathway calculated for CO2 insertion proceeds by an initial Ru-H hydride transfer to CO2 followed by rotation of the resulting N-H-stabilized formate to a Ru-O-bound formate. DFT calculations were used to evaluate the influence of the ancillary ligands on the thermodynamics of CO2 insertion, revealing that increasing the π acidity of the ligand cis to the hydride ligand and increasing the σ basicity of the ligand trans to it decreases the free energy of CO2 insertion, providing a strategy for the design of metal hydride systems capable of reversible, ergoneutral interconversion of CO2 and formate.
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 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 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".