MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2335111790 · doi:10.1139/cjc-2013-0338

Pt−Me bond cleavage in the reactions of dimethylplatinum(II) complexes containing chelating phosphine ligands with organotin(IV) chlorides

2013· article· en· W2335111790 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Badri Z. Momeni, Sedigheh Eatezadi

Bibliographic record

VenueCanadian Journal of Chemistry · 2013
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldChemistry
TopicOrganometallic Complex Synthesis and Catalysis
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsChemistryPhosphineMedicinal chemistryPlatinumLigand (biochemistry)Bond cleavageChelationStereochemistryCatalysisInorganic chemistryOrganic chemistry

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Selective Pt−Me bond activation of dimethylplatinum(II) complexes [PtMe2(PP)] (PP = dppm (bis(diphenylphosphino)methane), dppe (1,2-bis(diphenylphosphino)ethane), dppp (1,3-bis(diphenylphosphino)propane)) was achieved by SnMe2Cl2 to yield the corresponding platinum(II) complexes [PtMeCl(PP)] (PP = dppm, dppe, dppp) and cis-[PtCl2(PP)] (PP = dppm, dppp). On the other hand, the reactions of complexes [PtMe2(PP)] (PP = dppm, dppe, dppp) with SnPh3Cl resulted in the selective cleavage of the Pt−Me bond to afford the methylplatinum(II) complexes [PtMeCl(PP)]. Notably, the reaction of [PtMe2(dppm)] with SnMe2Cl2 and SnPh3Cl also gave the ionic A-frame complex [Pt2Me2(μ-Cl)(μ-dppm)2]Cl. The variable-temperature 1H and 31P NMR spectroscopy shows that the cleavage of the Pt−Me bond occurs very rapidly and the short-lived platinum(IV) intermediate is difficult to detect during the reaction. An explanation is presented on the basis of the nature of the strong π-acceptance of the phosphine ligand, which resulted in the formation of a very unstable platinum(IV) intermediate.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
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 score0.001
Threshold uncertainty score0.004

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0010.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.010
GPT teacher head0.196
Teacher spread0.186 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
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

Citations6
Published2013
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCanadian Journal of ChemistrySame topicOrganometallic Complex Synthesis and CatalysisFrench-language works237,207