MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2313218526 · doi:10.1002/ejic.201501305

Enhancing Reactivity of Directly íObservable B–H–Pt Interactions through Conformational Rigidity

2016· article· en· W2313218526 on OpenAlexafffund
Shrinwantu Pal, Marcus W. Drover, Brian O. Patrick, Jennifer A. Love

Bibliographic record

VenueEuropean Journal of Inorganic Chemistry · 2016
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldChemistry
TopicOrganoboron and organosilicon chemistry
Canadian institutionsUniversity of British Columbia
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada
KeywordsChemistryAgostic interactionIntramolecular forceReactivity (psychology)Intermolecular forceAcetonitrileStereochemistryCrystallographyNuclear magnetic resonance spectroscopyMoleculeMetalOrganic chemistry

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

We report for the first time the direct syntheses of trimethylplatinum(IV) complexes supported by bis(pyrazolyl)dihydridoborate (Bp) and bis(3,5‐dimethylpyrazolyl)dihydridoborate (Bp*) ligands from the corresponding dimethylplatinum(II) complexes. X‐ray crystallographic and multinuclear NMR characterization of the trimethylplatinum(IV) complexes reveal agostic B–H–Pt interactions. Solid‐state analysis reveals that BpPt IV Me 3 adopts a dinuclear structure featuring an intermolecular B–H–Pt bridge, whereas Bp*Pt IV Me 3 adopts a mononuclear structure containing an intramolecular B–H–Pt bridge. Addition of acetonitrile leads to cleavage of the weakly coordinating B–H–Pt interactions, and in the case of Bp*Pt IV Me 3 , leads to hydroboration of acetonitrile. The B–H fragment interacting with the Pt IV center in Bp*Pt IV Me 3 was also found to react with methanol to form a methoxy‐bridged complex. DFT calculations were employed to investigate the structural contributions to the difference in the reactivity of the Bp‐ and Bp*‐supported complexes.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: Bench or experimental
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.052
Threshold uncertainty score0.990

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0110.000

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 head0.016
GPT teacher head0.235
Teacher spread0.219 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

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

Citations13
Published2016
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueEuropean Journal of Inorganic ChemistrySame topicOrganoboron and organosilicon chemistryFrench-language works237,207