Synthesis and electrochemical evaluation of 2‐substituted imidazolium salts
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract Herein, we report the synthesis, electrochemical, and computational evaluation of six 2‐substituted imidazolium bromides and six 2‐substituted imidazolium triflates. All final compounds were obtained in 2 or fewer synthetic steps from inexpensive starting materials and display a single, irreversible electrochemical reduction. The reduction potentials span a range greater than 1 V depending on the electron withdrawing power of the 2‐substituent. Imidazolium bromides such as Bn 2 (H)ImBr reduce with E 1/2 = −2.70 V vs Fc/Fc + , whereas the electron‐withdrawing Br‐containing analog Bn 2 (Br)ImBr reduces at only −1.58 V vs Fc/Fc + . The reduction potential of imidazolium bromides obeys a linear free energy relationship to σ m Hammett constants, whereas imidazolium triflates correlate better with the σ p Hammett constants. These results indicate that the stabilizing effect of the 2‐substituent is anion‐sensitive, changing from induction to resonance upon exchanging bromide for triflate. Predicted electron affinities from density functional theory–optimized structures of imidazolium cations and reduced species more closely match experimental data for the triflates, suggesting that a triflate anion does not electronically perturb the imidazolium core as much as a bromide. Taken together, these data highlight the dual modularity of imidazolium salts by changing both 2‐substituent and anion.
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 | 0.001 |
| 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) | 0.000 | 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 teacher head, 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".