Substituent effects on gas‐phase homolytic Fe–N bond energies of <i>m</i>‐G‐C<sub>6</sub>H<sub>4</sub>NHFe(CO)<sub>2</sub>(η<sup>5</sup>‐C<sub>5</sub>H<sub>5</sub>) and <i>m</i>‐G‐C<sub>6</sub>H<sub>4</sub>N(COMe)Fe(CO)<sub>2</sub>(η<sup>5</sup>‐C<sub>5</sub>H<sub>5</sub>) studied using density functional theory methods
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract One of the most fundamental properties in chemistry is the bond dissociation energy, the energy required to break a specific bond of a molecule. In this paper, the Fe–N homolytic bond dissociation energies [ΔHhomo(Fe–N)'s] of 2 series of (meta‐substituted anilinyl)dicarbonyl(η5‐cyclopentadienyl) iron [m‐G‐C6H4NHFp (1)] and (meta‐substituted α‐acetylanilinyl)dicarbonyl(η5‐cyclopentadienyl) iron [m‐G‐C6H4N(COMe)Fp (2)] were studied using density functional theory methods with large basis sets. In this study, Fp is (η5‐C5H5)Fe(CO)2, and G is NO2, CN, COMe, CO2Me, CF3, Br, Cl, F, H, Me, MeO, and NMe2. The results show that Tao‐Perdew‐Staroverov‐Scuseria, Minnesota 2006, and Becke's power‐series ansatz from 1997 with dispersion corrections functionals can provide the best price/performance ratio and accurate predictions of ΔHhomo(Fe–N)'s. The ΔΔHhomo(Fe–N)'s (1 and 2) conform to the captodative principle. The polar effects of the meta‐substituents show the dominant role to the magnitudes of ΔΔHhomo(Fe–N)'s. σα· and σc· values for meta‐substituents are all related to polar effects. Spin‐delocalization effects of the meta‐substituents in ΔΔHhomo(Fe–N)'s are small but not necessarily zero. RE plays an important role in determining the net substituent effects on ΔHhomo(Fe–N)'s. Insight from this work may help the design of more effective catalytic processes.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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) | 0.003 | 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 itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".