MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4309287913 · doi:10.1002/asia.202201069

Catalytic Mechanisms of Transfer Hydrogenation of Azobenzene with Ammonia Borane by Pincer Bismuth Complex: Crucial Role of C=N Functional Group on the Pincer Ligand

2022· article· en· W4309287913 on OpenAlexaff
Qin Zhu, Shuoqi Zhang, Jing Ma, Jun Zhu, Shuhua Li, Guixiang Zeng

Bibliographic record

VenueChemistry - An Asian Journal · 2022
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldChemistry
TopicAsymmetric Hydrogenation and Catalysis
Canadian institutionsMinistry of Education and Child Care
FundersNational Natural Science Foundation of China
KeywordsPincer movementAmmonia boraneChemistryPincer ligandAzobenzeneCatalysisLigand (biochemistry)BoraneGibbs free energyTransfer hydrogenationPhotochemistryMedicinal chemistryInorganic chemistryCombinatorial chemistryMoleculeOrganic chemistry

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Transfer hydrogenation of azobenzene with ammonia borane mediated by pincer bismuth complex 1 was systematically investigated through density functional theory calculations. An unusual metal‐ligand cooperation mechanism was disclosed, in which the saturation/regeneration of the C=N functional group on the pincer ligand plays an essential role. The reaction is initiated by the hydrogenation of the C=N bond (saturation) with ammonia borane to afford 3 CN , which is the rate‐determining step with Gibbs energy barrier (ΔG ≠ ) and Gibbs reaction energy (ΔG) of 25.6 and −7.3 kcal/mol, respectively. 3 CN is then converted to a Bi−H intermediate through a water‐bridged pathway, which is followed up with the transfer hydrogenation of azobenzene to produce the final product N,N′‐diphenylhydrazine and regenerate the catalyst. Finally, the catalyst could be improved by substituting the phenyl group for the tert ‐butyl group on the pincer ligand, where the ΔG ≠ value (rate‐determining step) decreases to 24.0 kcal/mol.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: Bench or experimental
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.010
Threshold uncertainty score0.998

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.010
GPT teacher head0.198
Teacher spread0.188 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

Study designBench or experimental
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations4
Published2022
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueChemistry - An Asian JournalSame topicAsymmetric Hydrogenation and CatalysisFrench-language works237,207