MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W7051847107

Phosphaamidines and Phosphaguanidines as Ligands: Coordination Chemistry and Catalysis

2018· dissertation· en· W7051847107 on OpenAlexaff

Bibliographic record

VenueQSpace (Queen's University Library) · 2018
Typedissertation
Languageen
FieldPhysics and Astronomy
TopicMagnetic confinement fusion research
Canadian institutionsQueen's University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsYield (engineering)Context (archaeology)DiafiltrationField (mathematics)Tubulopathy
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Hemilabile ligands are useful because the activity at the metal centre can be manipulated and controlled by the labile groups. P,N donors are widely used hemilabile ligands in coordination and organometallic chemistry. Phosphorus is generally considered a soft donor and inert. Alternatively, nitrogen is considered a moderately hard donor and is labile. Late transition metals can complex with either the P or the N as a monodentate ligand or through both the P and the N as a bidentate ligand depending on the hardness of the metal centre and the ligand sterics. Phosphaamidines [RC(PR2)=NR] and phosphaguanidines [R2NC(PR2)=NR] are small bite angle bidentate ligands and promising hemilabile ligands. Having strongly basic sites near the metal centre should promote heterolytic cleavage of H2 or proton transfer that can assist in homogenous catalytic reactions like CO2 hydrogenation. A facile route is developed to prepare acyclic and aprotic phosphaamidine [PhC(PR2)=NR, R=Ph, iPr] and phosphaguanidine [Me2NC(PPh2)=NiPr] ligands that coordinate to Cu(I), Rh(I) and Ru(II) metal centres. Crystal structures are reported for all complexes. Coordination to Cu(I) occurs either through P in η1 mode or by both P or Nimine in a η2 mode. Coordination to Rh(I) occurs through η1or η2 modes while to Ru(II) occurs only through η2 mode. Tests of CO2 hydrogenation using phosphaamidine complexes showed that Ru(II) phosphaamidines are active precatalysts than Rh(I) phosphaamidines. Substitution of phenyl with isopropyl doesn’t have significant impact on the TON or the yield of formic acid in the presence of DBU. However, using Ru(II) phosphaguanidine instead of Ru(II) phosphaamidine increases the yield. A Ru(II) phosphaguanidine complex is also a potential precatalyst for the hydration of benzonitrile. It is also shown that a guanidine [Me2NC(NPh2)=NiPr] and a structurally analogous phosphaguanidine [Me2NC(PPh2)=NiPr] both act as Brønsted bases and have almost same basicity in acetonitrile solution. The proton coordinated to [Me2NC(PPh2)=NHiPr]Cl and therefore the basicity of the neutral form are both retained once the P is coordinated to Cu(I). The retention of basicity upon coordination of this salt to a metal centre is also supported by the observation of π electron delocalization within the amidine unit by X-ray crystallography.

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 communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.001

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 head0.003
GPT teacher head0.196
Teacher spread0.193 · 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

Citations0
Published2018
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueQSpace (Queen's University Library)→Same topicMagnetic confinement fusion research→French-language works237,207→