MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4407041635 · doi:10.1021/jacs.4c16123

Photolytic and Thermal Reactions of [C<sub>6</sub>H<sub>4</sub>(PPh<sub>2</sub>)<sub>2</sub>(μ-N<sub>2</sub>)] and Its Lewis Acid Adducts: N–N Bond Cleavage and Liberation of N<sub>2</sub>

2025· article· en· W4407041635 on OpenAlexafffund
Linkun Miao, Jason Yeung, Amir Yeganeh-Salman, Zheng‐Wang Qu, Stefan Grimme, Douglas W. Stephan

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of the American Chemical Society · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldChemistry
TopicOrganoboron and organosilicon chemistry
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Toronto
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of CanadaDeutsche Forschungsgemeinschaft
KeywordsChemistryAdductLewis acids and basesBond cleavagePhosphineThermal decompositionAcceptorFrustrated Lewis pairMedicinal chemistryPhotodissociationPhotochemistryStereochemistryOrganic chemistryCatalysis

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The known species (Ph 3 P) 2 N 2 was previously described as two phosphine donors associated with a doubly Lewis acidic N 2 -unit based on its thermal liberation of N 2 . Herein, we prepare the related species [C 6 H 4 (PPh 2 ) 2 (μ-N 2 )] 4, where the cisoid chelation of the N 2 fragment facilitates both N 2 liberation and N–N bond cleavage reactions. In addition, these reactions can be achieved selectively via thermolysis of a Lewis acid adduct of 4 or by direct photolysis, respectively. These findings provide insights on avenues to P(V) reduction, photochemical N–C bond formation, and the design of donor–acceptor combinations for N 2 capture and functionalization.

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 machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
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 score0.002
Threshold uncertainty score0.006

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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 head0.006
GPT teacher head0.219
Teacher spread0.212 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
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

Citations8
Published2025
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of the American Chemical SocietySame topicOrganoboron and organosilicon chemistryFrench-language works237,207