Alkene Insertions into a Ru–PR<sub>2</sub> Bond
Bibliographic record
Abstract
High Resolution Image Download MS PowerPoint Slide An unusually broad series of discrete alkene insertion reactions has provided the opportunity to examine the mechanism(s) of this fundamental carbon–heteroatom bond-forming process. Ethylene, electron-rich and electron-poor (activated) alkenes all react with the Ru–P double bond in Ru(η 5 -indenyl)(PCy 2 )(PPh 3 ) to form κ 2 -ruthenaphosphacyclobutanes. Thermal decomposition of these metallacycles in solution, via alkene deinsertion and β-hydride elimination, is particularly favored for electron-rich alkenes, and hydride-containing decomposition products are implicit intermediates in the observed isomerization of 1-hexene. Kinetic studies, including a Hammett analysis of the insertion reactions of para-substituted styrenes, suggest that two distinct inner-sphere pathways operate for the insertion of electron-rich versus activated alkenes. DFT analyses have identified one pathway involving simple cycloaddition via a four-centered transition state and another that proceeds through an η 2 -alkene intermediate. Such an intermediate was observed spectroscopically during formation of the ethylene metallacycle, but not for substituted alkenes. We propose that “pre-polarized”, activated alkenes participate in direct cycloaddition, while rate-determining η 2 -adduct formation is necessary for the activation of electron-rich alkenes toward migratory insertion into the Ru–P bond.
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 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 | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.030 | 0.002 |
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; both teacher heads agree on what is shown here.
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".