Synthesis, Characterization, and Reactivity of Low-Coordinate Titanium(III) Amido Complexes
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Low-coordinate titanium(III) amido complexes were readily prepared via treatment of β-TiCl3 with 1 or 2 equiv of Li[N(SiiPr3)DIPP] (DIPP = 2,6-di-iso-propylphenyl) to form dinuclear [{Ti(N(SiiPr3)DIPP)Cl(μ-Cl)}2] (1) or mononuclear Ti[N(SiiPr3)DIPP]2Cl (2), respectively. Both complexes were characterized by a variety of methods, including NMR spectroscopy, Evans method magnetic susceptibility, and single-crystal X-ray diffraction studies. Complex 1 was shown to be a versatile precursor for salt metathesis reactions to form heteroleptic complexes bearing alkoxide or silyl ligands. Alternatively, 1 formed adducts with Lewis bases such as 4-dimethylaminopyridine (DMAP) that are paramagnetic, mononuclear species. The base-stabilized complex 5 was alkylated with 1 or 2 equiv of LiCH2SiMe3 to form mono- or dialkyl products, respectively. In contrast, treatment of complex 1 in the absence of DMAP with 2 equiv of LiCH2SiMe3 results in the ultimate formation of a dinuclear cyclometalated complex 9 bearing a [Ti2(μ-Cl)2(μ:η1-CH2SiMe2CH2-)] core. This study demonstrates the convenient synthesis of a family of low-coordinate titanium(III) amido complexes possessing a variety of neutral and monoanionic ligands.
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) | 0.000 | 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) | 0.013 | 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".