Chan–Evans–Lam Couplings with Copper Iminoarylsulfonate Complexes: Scope and Mechanism
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Copper(II) pyridyliminoarylsulfonate complexes with chloride or triflate counteranions were employed in Chan–Evans–Lam (CEL) couplings of N-nucleophiles and arylboronic acids. The complexes avoided typical side reactions in CEL couplings, and an excess of boronic acid was not required. Water was tolerated, and addition of neither base nor other additives was necessary. Primary amines, acyclic and cyclic secondary amines, anilines, aminophenol, imidazole, pyrazole, and phenyltetrazole can be quantitatively arylated at either 25 or 50 °C with 2.5 mol % of the catalyst. Reaction kinetics were investigated in detail. Kinetic and spectroscopic studies provide evidence for the formation of unproductive copper–substrate complexes. Formation of an aniline–phenylboronic acid adduct was responsible for the zero-order dependence of reaction rates on phenylboronic acid concentration. Kinetic evidence indicates that the order of reaction steps is transmetalation, nucleophile coordination, and oxidation. Couplings performed poorly with electron-deficient arylboronic acids, due to a slower Cu(II)/Cu(III) oxidation in the catalytic cycle. Photoredox catalysis partially resolved this problem, but addition of copper acetate as an external oxidant proved to be more efficient.
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.
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) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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 it