A Blueprint for Secondary Coordination Sphere Editing: Approaches Toward Lewis‐Acid Assisted Carbon Dioxide Co‐Activation
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract Carbon dioxide (CO 2 ) is a potent greenhouse gas of environmental concern. Seeking to offer a solution to the “CO 2 ‐problem”, the chemistry community has turned a focus toward transition metal complexes which can activate, reduce, and convert CO 2 into carbon‐based products. The design of such systems involves judicious selection of both metal and accompanying donor ligand; in part, these efforts are motivated by biological metalloenzymes that undertake similar transformations. As a design element, metal‐ligand cooperativity, which leverages intramolecular interactions between a transition metal and an adjacent secondary ligand site, has been acknowledged as a vitally important component by the CO 2 activation community. These systems offer a “push‐pull” style of activation where electron density is chaperoned onto CO 2 with an accompanying electrophile, such as a Lewis‐acid, playing the role of acceptor. This pairing allows for the stabilization of reactive C x H y O z ‐containing intermediates and can bias CO 2 product selectivity. In the laboratory, chemists can test hypotheses and ideas, enabling rationalization of why a given pairing of transition metal/Lewis‐acid leads to selective CO 2 reduction outcomes. This Concept identifies literature examples and highlights key design properties, allowing interested contributors to design, create, and implement novel systems for productive transformations of a small molecule (CO 2 ) with huge potential impact.
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 | 0.001 |
| 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".