Synthesis, Characterization, and Catalytic Exploration of Mononuclear Mo(VI) Dioxido Complexes of (Z)-1-R-2-(4′,4′-Dimethyl-2′-oxazolin-2′-yl)-eth-1-en-1-ates
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The coordination chemistry of the title ligands with Mo metal centers was investigated. Thus, the synthesis and characterization (NMR, X-ray diffraction) of four mononuclear formally Mo(6+) complexes of (Z)-1-R-2-(4′,4′-dimethyl-2′-oxazolin-2′-yl)-eth-1-en-1-ates (L: R = –Ph, –Ph-p-NO2, –Ph-p-OMe and –t-Bu), derived from the part enols (LH), is described. The resulting air-stable MoO2L2 complexes (1–4) exist, as shown by single-crystal X-ray diffraction experiments, in the cis-dioxido-trans(N)-κ2-N,O-L conformation in the solid state for all four examples. This situation was further probed using semi-empirical PM6(tm) calculations. Complexes 1–4 represent the first Mo complexes of this ligand class and, indeed, of Group 6 metals in general. Structural and spectroscopic comparisons were made between these and related Mo(6+) compounds. Complex 1 (R = –Ph) was studied for its ability to selectively catalyze the production of poly-norbornene from the monomer in the presence of MAO. This, unfortunately, only resulted in the synthesis of insoluble, presumably highly cross-linked, polymeric and/or oligomeric materials. However, complexes 1–4 were demonstrated to be highly effective for catalyzing benzoin to benzil conversion using DMSO as the O-transfer agent. This catalysis work is likewise put into perspective with respect to analogous Mo(6+) complexes.
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 | 0.000 |
| 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 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".