Carbon–Hydrogen versus Nitrogen–Oxygen Bond Activation in Reactions of N-Oxide Derivatives of 2,2′-Bipyridine and 1,10-Phenanthroline with a Dimethylplatinum(II) Complex
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The reactions of the potential oxygen atom donor ligands 1,10-phenanthroline N -oxide (phenO) and 2,2′-bipyridine N -oxide (bipyO) with the dimethylplatinum(II) complex [Pt 2 Me 4 (μ-SMe 2 ) 2 ] are reported. The reaction with the more rigid ligand phenO gave [PtMe 2 (κ 2 N, O -phenO)], which underwent oxidative addition with 4- t -Bu-C 6 H 4 CH 2 Br to give the platinum(IV) complex [PtBrMe 2 (CH 2 C 6 H 4 -4- t -Bu)(phenO)]. The complex [PtMe 2 (phenO)] reacted with methanol in air to give [Pt(OH)(OMe)Me 2 (phenO)], but under an inert atmosphere it gave [Pt(OH)(OMe)Me 2 (phen)], in a reaction involving N–O bond activation. In contrast, the reaction of [Pt 2 Me 4 (μ-SMe 2 ) 2 ] with bipyO occurred by C–H bond activation to give methane and [PtMe(κ 2 N, C -C 5 H 4 N-C 5 H 3 NO)(SMe 2 )], which underwent ligand substitution with pyridine, triphenylphosphine, or bis(diphenylphosphino)methane (dppm) to give [PtMe(κ 2 N, C -C 5 H 4 N-C 5 H 3 NO)(NC 5 H 5 )], [PtMe(κ 2 N, C -C 5 H 4 N-C 5 H 3 NO)(PPh 3 )], or the binuclear [{PtMe(κ 2 N, C -C 5 H 4 N-C 5 H 3 NO)} 2 (μ-dppm)], respectively. With bis(diphenylphosphino)ethane (dppe), ligand substitution gave [PtMe(κ 1 C -C 5 H 4 N-C 5 H 3 NO)(dppe)], which contains a monodentate metalated bipyO ligand. The mechanisms of the key reactions are discussed.
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.
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 | 0.001 |
| 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) | 0.001 | 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 it