MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2745996412 · doi:10.1021/acscatal.7b01486

Ligand Effects and Kinetic Investigations of Sterically Accessible 2-Pyridonate Tantalum Complexes for Hydroaminoalkylation

2017· article· en· W2745996412 on OpenAlexafffund
Jason W. Brandt, Eugene Chong, Laurel L. Schafer

Bibliographic record

VenueACS Catalysis · 2017
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldChemistry
TopicAsymmetric Hydrogenation and Catalysis
Canadian institutionsUniversity of British Columbia
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of CanadaCanada Research Chairs
KeywordsChemistryReactivity (psychology)TantalumSteric effectsDeprotonationLigand (biochemistry)CatalysisAlkeneAlkylationCatalytic cycleIntermolecular forceCombinatorial chemistryAmine gas treatingStereochemistryMedicinal chemistryOrganic chemistryMolecule

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The synthesis of a series of structurally varied pyridonate-supported tantalum amido complexes and their catalytic reactivity in the intermolecular α-alkylation of unprotected secondary amines are described. Both terminal and internal alkenes can undergo this hydroaminoalkylation reaction to give selectively substituted secondary amine products. The reactivity profiles of 3- and 6-substituted pyridonate tantalum complexes, [(2-pyridonate)Ta(NMe 2 ) 3 Cl], and a triflato pyridonate tantalum complex, [(2-pyridonate)Ta(NMe 2 ) 3 OTf], were evaluated to analyze ligand effects. The deprotonation and complexation of commercially available 3-methyl-2-pyridone and 2-pyridone readily yielded effective, catalytically active tantalum complexes, displaying reactivity with both terminal and internal alkene substrates. Kinetic studies and deuterium labeling experiments reveal a complex kinetic profile and provide evidence for off-cycle equilibria that dominate catalytic activity and provide guidance for future catalyst development.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation 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 score0.039
Threshold uncertainty score0.623

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

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

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 head0.019
GPT teacher head0.275
Teacher spread0.256 · 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.

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

Citations42
Published2017
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueACS CatalysisSame topicAsymmetric Hydrogenation and CatalysisFrench-language works237,207