Substituent effects on gas‐phase homolytic Fe–O and Fe–S bond energies of <i>m</i>‐G‐C<sub>6</sub>H<sub>4</sub>OFe(CO)<sub>2</sub>(η<sup>5</sup>‐C<sub>5</sub>H<sub>5</sub>) and <i>m</i>‐G‐C<sub>6</sub>H<sub>4</sub>SFe(CO)<sub>2</sub>(η<sup>5</sup>‐C<sub>5</sub>H<sub>5</sub>) studied using Hartree–Fock and density functional theory methods
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The thermochemistry of organometallic complexes in solution and in the gas phase has been an area of increasing research interest. In this paper, the Fe–O and Fe–S homolytic bond dissociation energies [ΔHhomo(Fe–O)'s and ΔHhomo(Fe–S)'s] of two series of meta‐substituted phenoxydicarbonyl(η5‐cyclopentadienyl) iron [m‐G‐C6H4OFp (1)] and (meta‐substituted benzenethiolato)dicarbonyl(η5‐cyclopentadienyl) iron [m‐G‐C6H4SFp (2)] were studied using Hartree–Fock and density functional theory methods with large basis sets. In this study, Fp is (η5‐C5H5)Fe(CO)2, and G are NO2, CN, COMe, CO2Me, CF3, Br, Cl, F, H, Me, MeO, and NMe2. The results show that Tao–Perdew–Staroverov–Scuseria and Minnesota 2006 functionals can provide the best price/performance ratio and accurate predictions of ΔHhomo(Fe–O)'s and ΔHhomo(Fe–S)'s. The polar effects of the meta substituents show that the dominant role to the magnitudes of ΔΔHhomo(Fe–O)'s or ΔΔHhomo(Fe–S)'s. σα·, σc· values for meta substituents are all related to polar effects. Spin‐delocalization effects of the meta substituents in ΔΔHhomo(Fe–O)'s and ΔΔHhomo(Fe–S)'s are small but not necessarily zero. Molecular effects rather than ΔΔHhomo(Fe–O)'s and ΔΔHhomo(Fe–S)'s are more suitable indexes for the overall substituent effects on ΔHhomo(Fe–O)'s and ΔHhomo(Fe–S)'s. The meta substituent effects of meta‐electron‐withdrawing groups on the Fe–S bonds are much stronger than those on the Fe–O bonds. For meta‐electron‐donating groups, the meta substituent effects have the comparable magnitudes between series 1 and 2. ΔΔHhomo(Fe–O)'s (1) and ΔΔHhomo(Fe–S)'s (2) conform to the captodative principle. Insight from this work may help the design of more effective catalytic processes. Copyright © 2015 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.
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) | 0.003 | 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".