Unraveling the Roles of Amines in Atom Transfer Radical Polymerization in the Dark
Bibliographic record
Abstract
High Resolution Image Download MS PowerPoint Slide Multidentate amines have been widely used as ligands (L) for Cu-catalysts in atom transfer radical polymerization (ATRP) and as electron donors in photochemically induced polymerizations. However, mechanistic aspects of the role of amines in ATRP in the dark have remained elusive. Herein, the structure–activity relationship and the related electron transfer reactions with Br–Cu II /L complexes and/or with alkyl bromides (R-Br) were investigated for 25 amines. Amines function as electron donors and reducing agents for Br–Cu II /L complexes via an outer sphere electron transfer (OSET) mechanism, enabling slow but continuous generation of Cu I /L activators and inducing controlled ATRP. However, two amines, diazabicyclo(5.4.0)undec-7-ene (DBU) and 1,1,3,3-tetramethylguanidine (TMG), reduced Br–Cu II /L faster, suggesting an inner sphere electron transfer (ISET) process. ATRP, starting with initial deactivators (Br–Cu II /L) species, proceeded in the dark in the presence of an excess of tertiary amines, such as tris[2-(dimethylamino)ethyl]amine (Me 6 TREN), 1,4-diazabicyclo[2.2.2]octane (DABCO), and TMG at room temperature and afforded polymers with low dispersities ( Đ ≤ 1.15). With copper(II) triflate complex (Cu II /L +2, – (OTf) 2 ), which has a more positive reduction potential, ATRP proceeded at room temperature with several inexpensive secondary and tertiary amines including triethylamine (TEA) and dimethylethanolamine (DMAE). Interestingly, multidentate amines also served as direct R-Br activators at elevated temperatures (60 °C). In all cases, chains were initiated with R-Br and not by the amine radical cations as byproducts of electron transfer. Amines also enabled ATRP in the presence of residual air in flasks with a large headspace, underpinning them as a robust and accessible reducing agent for practical applications.
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 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 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".